FAMILIES of the two Scots victims of the Tunisia terror attack are among those are to sue Thomson holidays' owner TUI, it has been confirmed.
The announcement was made after a coroner ruled the 30 British victims were "unlawfully killed" by a gunman at a hotel in Sousse in June 2015 at the end of a seven-week inquest.
After relatives listened tearfully to Loraine-Smith’s summing up, in which he rejected an argument by the families that neglect by the tour operator played a part in the tragedy.
Nevertheless, a solicitor for 22 of the victims’ families said her clients would launch civil proceedings against TUI, with whom all 30 had booked their trip.
Andrew Ritchie QC, who represented the families, acknowledged that the law restricted the coroner’s ability to ascribe blame and said the families had found that structure “both helpful and frustrating”.
Judge Loraine-Smith said that better planning and actions by hotel staff may not have prevented the atrocity in which 38 people were killed by radicalised Islamic extremist Seifeddine Rezgui.
The firm confirmed that among the families of Scots victims William and Lisa Graham of Bankfoot, aged 51 and 50 and Jim and Ann McQuire both 66 and 63, from Cumbernauld, were among those who will be taking further court action.
Judge Nicholas Loraine-Smith ruled the police response was "at best shambolic and at worst cowardly".
TUI maintained it was "wholly erroneous" to claim it had been neglectful and there was insufficient evidence of any gross failure.
Kylie Hutchison, a solicitor at Irwin Mitchell, which is pursuing claims with the families said: “It is now crucial that the whole travel industry learns from what happened in Sousse to reduce the risk of similar catastrophic incidents in the future.
“On behalf of our clients who lost members of their family and those who suffered injuries in this terrible incident, we will now be preparing to commence civil proceedings against Tui.”
One of the key elements of their case surrounds security breakdowns i the aftermath of "terrifying" events at the Bardo museum in Tunis in March 2015 in which 22 tourists were killed.
The legal team for the families say the Tunisian Minister of Tourism wrote to alert all hotels requiring them to improve security measures. They say that "tragically" these steps were not implemented at the Imperial Marhaba Hotel.
“TUI the tour operator who organised the holidays for the victims has stated that it was unaware of the letter from the Minister of Tourism. Even more surprisingly, given the events in Bardo and elsewhere in Tunisia, TUI failed to audit the adequacy of security precautions at the Imperial Marhaba Hotel," said Irwin Mitchell partner Clive Garner.
Many of the families gave evidence that they were unaware of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) travel advice that there was a "high threat from terrorism" in Tunisia and/or were unaware of the detailed content of the travel advice and that neither TUI's 2015 written brochure nor their website informed them of the content of the advice before they booked.
Speaking outside the court, TUI’s UK managing director, Nick Longman, said the company was “so very sorry” for the “pain and loss those affected have suffered”. He added: “As an industry we have adapted and we will need to continue to do so.”
In summing up the judge did find that TUI did not inform customers where to find the advice after the Bardo museum attack and that they believed they had been reassured, although this was disputed by TUI.
The coroner said: “It does not give any details of the attack but only refers to ‘the incident that took place there yesterday’. It doesn’t mention the phrase terrorism. It refers to the FCO advice but it gives no guidance as to where it’s going to be found.”
He added: “A number of customers did believe they had been reassured to their safety and further customers would not have gone to Tunisia if they had seen the FCO travel advice.”
But the judge said legal precedents prevented inquests from applying a conclusion of neglect to tourists on holiday because they were not “dependent” on the travel company or hotel.
Referring to existing precedents, he said: “They very substantially limit the circumstances in which neglect can feature in the conclusions.”
The judge said although in general the response of the hotel staff was "disorganised and chaotic" some of them displayed "conspicuous personal courage" in their efforts to protect the guests.
And he added that there were a lot of “what ifs” around the case, and better hotel security may simply have meant that more people died on the beach instead.
The attack at the five-star Riu Imperial Marhaba hotel was the deadliest on Britons since the July 7, 2005 London bombings.
The Islamist gunman, Seifeddine Rezgui, was shot dead by police after his hour-long killing spree.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here