The High Court has been told that a legal challenge against the Ministry of Defence (MOD) over the 1994 RAF Chinook helicopter crash should be allowed to proceed, amid concerns about the aircraft's airworthiness. Twenty-nine serving military personnel died when the Chinook HC-2 helicopter crashed into the Mull of Kintyre in south-west Scotland on June 2, 1994. A 2011 inquiry overturned an initial decision that blamed the pilots, but the cause of the crash remains undetermined.
Families Seek Independent Investigation
The Chinook Justice Campaign (CJC), representing over 55 family members of 25 victims, is challenging the MOD's alleged ongoing failure to establish an independent and effective investigation into the crash, which they argue violates human rights. Lawyers for the group told the High Court on Tuesday that information regarding the Chinook's airworthiness raises a more than arguable claim that those who died were placed on an aircraft known to be unsafe.
Sam Jacobs, representing the CJC, told the court in London that there were profound and stark concerns about airworthiness, yet no investigation had ever considered the issue despite several probes. He stated: "It is historic, but it is also extraordinary, that the bereaved families of 29 individuals… still face unanswered questions into the circumstances of what is often described as the RAF's worst peacetime disaster." He added that the families want candour from the MOD about what it knows and what opportunities may have existed to avoid such a major loss of life.
MOD Defends Legal Challenge
The MOD is defending the legal bid, arguing that the claim has been brought too late and that human rights have not been breached. Daniel Beard KC, for the MOD, said in written submissions that the crash had been subject to extensive investigations and that the CJC had not raised any information capable of reviving any investigative obligation. He also contended that the Boeing litigation was not relevant to the crash and that the CJC's case was based on vague assertions about airworthiness, without explaining why the legal challenge had not been brought sooner.
Beard added: "The claimant understandably wants to bring the full facts to light. However, that aspiration must be considered in view of the evidential limitations, the civil claims that have been resolved, the lessons that have been learned and the transformed operational context."
Airworthiness Concerns Detailed
In written submissions, Mr Jacobs noted that the crash occurred two days after the helicopter was delivered, following a fraught upgrade and introduction. He said the MOD was suing Boeing over the upgrade before the crash, and that a safety-critical engine control system on the helicopter was described by the Aircraft and Armament Experimental Establishment as having a "density of deficiencies." He also said the helicopter needed one of its engines replaced three times in the months before the incident, with issues reported with its second engine.
Mr Jacobs argued: "It is plainly arguable that airworthiness caused the crash; indeed, arguable that the HC-2 should not have been flying at all." He continued that there was nothing before the court to indicate that the imperative to deploy the HC-2 was so severe and the concerns as to airworthiness sufficiently mitigated that the decision to deploy was immune from reasonable criticism.
Previous Investigations
The incident was first investigated by an internal Board of Inquiry in 1995, which concluded that the pilots, Flight Lieutenants Jonathan Tapper and Richard Cook, were at fault. However, a Scottish Fatal Accident Inquiry and the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee both reached different conclusions. The Board of Inquiry's findings were overturned following a 2011 review, although that review did not determine the cause of the crash.
Speaking outside the Royal Courts of Justice on Tuesday, Andy Tobias, whose father Lieutenant Colonel John Tobias MBE died in the crash, described it as a "hugely momentous day." Several relatives of those who died attended court, some of whom wept during the hearing. The hearing before Mr Justice Butcher is due to conclude later on Tuesday.
