Military Claims — No Win No Fee
Serving and former members of the UK armed forces can bring personal injury claims against the Ministry of Defence and third parties on a no win no fee basis. Common claims include hearing damage, non-freezing cold injury, PTSD, and equipment-related injuries.
What Are the Most Common Military Injury Claims?
Direct Answer: Common military claims include noise-induced hearing loss, non-freezing cold injury, training accidents, combat injuries, and PTSD. Claims are made against the Ministry of Defence. The Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) is an alternative, but civil claims on a CFA can yield higher damages.
- Noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) — exposure to weapons fire, vehicles, aircraft, and industrial noise without adequate hearing protection
- Non-freezing cold injury (NFCI) — nerve damage from prolonged exposure to cold and wet conditions, particularly affecting the hands and feet
- PTSD and psychological injuries — combat-related trauma, bullying, harassment
- Training injuries — injuries during physical training, exercises, and live firing
- Equipment and vehicle injuries — defective or inadequate equipment, vehicle accidents
- Clinical negligence — negligent medical treatment in military hospitals or facilities
What Is the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS)?
The Armed Forces Compensation Scheme is a tariff-based, no-fault scheme. Compensation ranges from £1,236 (lowest tariff) to £650,000 (most serious injuries), with additional guaranteed income payments (GIP) for more severe cases. The AFCS does not require proof of negligence — only that the injury is attributable to or aggravated by service. Receiving an AFCS award does not prevent you from also pursuing a common law negligence claim.
Smith v Ministry of Defence [2013]
This landmark Supreme Court decision confirmed that the MoD owes a duty of care to service personnel under Article 2 (right to life) of the European Convention on Human Rights, and that combat immunity is limited to tactical decisions made in the heat of battle. Systemic failures in training, equipment procurement, and operational planning can give rise to actionable negligence.
Frequently Asked Questions
You May Also Be Interested In
Where this applies: This page covers England and Wales. The rules in Scotland and Northern Ireland are different.
Sources for this page
Every rule stated above is based on the primary sources below. Each link goes to the legislation, court rule or regulator itself so you can check it. Last verified 2 August 2026.
- Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, s.58 (conditional fee agreements)
The provision that makes CFAs lawful and enforceable. CFAs derive from this section, not from LASPO.
- Conditional Fee Agreements Order 2013, arts. 4–5 · in force from 1 April 2013
Art. 4 caps the success fee at 100% of base costs. Art. 5 caps what may be taken from damages in personal injury at 25% of PSLA plus past pecuniary loss, net of CRU, at first instance.
- Civil Procedure Rules, Part 44 (incl. rr.44.13–44.17, QOCS)
Qualified one-way costs shifting and its exceptions. Rule 44.14 was amended with effect from 6 April 2023.
Who wrote and checked this page
- Written and published by
- Edward & Amaury Solicitors (Edward & Amaury Ltd, company no. 12195443), regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under no. 800525.
- Legal review
- Checked for England & Wales by Edward & Amaury Solicitors — Solicitors regulated by the SRA (no. 800525) (verify on the regulator’s register).Review is recorded against the firm. The individual reviewer is not named on this page.
- Review dates
- Last reviewed 2 August 2026. Next review due 2 February 2027.
Fee rules change. California’s medical malpractice fee limits changed on 1 January 2023, and the QOCS rules in England and Wales changed on 6 April 2023. If you spot something out of date, tell us — we publish corrections.