MoD gags military veterans after finally settling Lariam cases

After a 9-year legal battle, UK armed forces service personnel who suffered physical and psychological side-effects after being prescribed controversial anti-malarial drug Lariam have reached an out of court settlement with the Ministry of Defence (MoD).

The “substantial settlement” - announced today by Hilary Meredith Solicitors - marks the end of the David and Goliath type legal action with the MoD previously accused of adopting a “deny until they die” approach to proceedings.

According to MoD figures, a minimum of 17,368 armed forces personnel were prescribed Lariam at least once between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2015.

Even now, in reaching the settlement, the MoD has insisted on a “gagging clause” to prevent details being made public. It can however be revealed that Hilary Meredith Solicitors has agreed a framework for settlement and all cases are being valued individually with counsel’s advice.

Commenting on the settlement, Hilary Meredith-Beckham, Chair of Hilary Meredith Solicitors said:

“After a 9-year legal battle and some very dark moments along the way, I am delighted to confirm that this landmark legal action has now settled out of court.

“I would like to pay tribute to the bravery of our clients. Cast aside by the MoD, they put their faith in me to deliver justice. It has been an honour to represent them. I would also like to thank our outstanding team at Hilary Meredith Solicitors and counsel, Simeon Maskrey KC and Charles Curtis.”

Criticising the MoD’s approach throughout the case, Hilary Meredith-Beckham added:

“This case could have been settled within 5 years. It was complex involving the causal effects of the tablet on each individual soldier and in fairness we suffered the Covid years in the middle, but 9 years is outrageous.

“As well as our clients it is the taxpayer who pays the price when the defendant is a government body.

“An insurer would have acted commercially, the government - mainly a Conservative government throughout this case - avoid, prevaricate, hide and delay. As a result, costs run into £ millions.

“When there is such a need to support our damaged NHS, our care services, repair our roads, fix education, housing, immigration, 9 years to settle a case for the military, followed by multiples of months procrastinating over costs that have to be paid, and all contributing to greater cost, is simply ridiculous. 

“My view is that the handling of negligence cases against the MoD should be taken out of their hands and handed to an insurer, acting independently and with a commercial view to early settlement. The MoD used to instruct an external insurer and cases settled far quicker with a reduction in legal costs.”

During the litigation, Mrs Meredith-Beckham and her team uncovered that only 5-10% of all those who took Lariam actually had an entry in their records. As such, medics were often unaware that the psychotic behaviour they were treating was caused by the controversial anti-malarial drug. 

Lariam, developed within clandestine American military research programmes, was first licenced in 1989 and adopted by the UK military from 1991. Side effects range from confusion to anxiety, nightmares, depression, hallucinations and suicide ideation.

As far back as 2007, Dr Franz B Humer, then chairman of manufacturer Roche, told the company’s annual general meeting: “More effective anti-malarials with better side-effect profiles were now available, and these were generally used.”

In 2016, a damning House of Commons Defence Select Committee report said the drug should no longer be used in all but exceptional circumstances, confirming many soldiers had discarded their prescription for fear of the consequences and that the MoD had neglected to follow manufacturers’ guidance. It further castigated the MoD for its “lamentable failure” in its Duty of Care towards service personnel. A number of suicides have been directly linked to the drug.

Continued Hilary Meredith-Beckham:

“Soon after Lariam was brought to international markets in late 1980s, users began to experience shocking side-effects. Yet over the coming decades, as the drug became implicated in ever-increasing acts of unexplained violence, homicide and suicide, the MoD continued to force Lariam on thousands of unsuspecting troops deployed to some of the world’s most dangerous places. Our clients have suffered appalling side-effects.”

Mrs Meredith-Beckham says there are clear parallels between the Lariam litigation and the Post Office scandal, while the Hughes Report, published last year by England’s patient safety commissioner Dr Henrietta Hughes, also criticised the adversarial nature of the legal system for those harmed by pelvic mesh and medicine valproate.

“We have taken on an opponent with unlimited resources for 9 long years,” continued Mrs Meredith-Beckham.

“The MoD’s pockets, funded by the taxpayer, are much deeper than ours. 

“A freedom of information request by my firm revealed they spend £20 million a year just on legal costs defending claims from soldiers and veterans.

“The MoD is treating our soldiers like the enemy. They’re fighting cases they should be settling and putting our heroes through hell.

“They’re stubbornly defending claims and adopting aggressive and unnecessary stalling tactics. In reality, the MoD is defending its own mistakes and is unwilling to take a step back and look at the bigger picture. The taxpayers’ money the MoD is wasting on legal costs would be placed in the hands of those who need it the most - our injured soldiers and veterans.

“A number of our Lariam clients are in increasingly poor health and have been driven to breaking point. For nearly a decade, the MoD has fought the brave men and women who served their country, despite being forced to admit that they made numerous failures in terms of risk assessments and warnings about the possible side effects of the drug. We were ready and willing to go to trial before securing this settlement.”

Mrs Meredith-Beckham believes a number of unanswered questions regarding Lariam go to the heart of government.

She continued:

“In particular, there are questions around the role of Lord Nicholas Soames, Winston Churchill’s grandson and former equerry to King Charles, who was a Director of Roche for 9 months between July 1991 and April 1992.

“During the 1990s, members of parliament regularly highlighted the risks of Lariam by means of Early Day Motions, written questions and debates.

“The then Sir Nicholas served as Minister of State for the Armed Forces from 1994 to 1997 and is described as the leading expert in Anglo-American defence matters. He would have been well aware, or should have been, of the widespread concerns over Lariam. Why on earth did he remain silent? Our soldiers were taking a drug known to cause psychotic side effects while operating tanks and firearms while our Minister of State for the Armed Forces, who was previously a director of Roche, the manufacturer, sat on his hands.”

Mrs Meredith-Beckham is now calling on the Government and its Select Defence Committee to revisit the original Lariam Inquiry.

She added:

“We owe a duty to our armed forces to see that not only justice is done but that morally and ethically we are protecting them as they protect us.

“This legal action has settled and the right compensation has been paid but we still don’t know the full story. Powerful people in powerful positions have withheld the truth.

“Ultimately, the MoD didn’t want this case to play out in open court and their insistence on a gagging clause is very telling.”