Harry Dunn’s family can bring claim for damages against Anne Sacoolas in US, judge rules

A civil claim for damages against Harry Dunn’s alleged killer Anne Sacoolas can go ahead in the US due to her “refusal” to return to the UK to stand trial, an American judge has ruled.

Ms Sacoolas applied to dismiss the case on the grounds that it should be heard in the UK, despite her legal team admitting she would not agree to face trial there due to a “concern” she would not “receive fair treatment”.

The 43-year-old travelled back to the US in August 2019 after the State Department asserted diplomatic immunity on her behalf following a crash which killed Harry outside RAF Croughton in Northamptonshire.

She was then charged with causing the teenager's death by dangerous driving but an extradition request was rejected by the Trump administration in January last year.

On Tuesday, Judge Thomas Ellis said it was “commendable” that Ms Sacoolas had admitted she was negligent in the accident and that her negligence had caused Mr Dunn’s death.

However, the US judge added that this did “not equate acceptance of responsibility”.

“Full acceptance of responsibility entails facing those harmed by her negligence and taking responsibility for her acts where they occurred, in the United Kingdom,” he said.

Mr Ellis also noted the “firm support” from foreign secretary Dominic Raab, who submitted a letter to the court backing the family’s right to bring the case.

“It is of course for the US courts to decide the issue of venue but for our part the British government takes the view that British citizens can bring their case in whichever court they think appropriate,” the judge said.

“I hope therefore [the Dunn family's] action in the United States is able to proceed.”

In response to the ruling, Harry’s mother Charlotte Charles, said: “We are pleased and relieved at the court's decision.

“We only took this step as a last resort following the denial of justice in the extradition case on strong legal advice from our legal team.”

Earlier this month, Ms Sacoolas’ legal team submitted its application to dismiss the case, in which the US court was told Ms Sacoolas and her husband Jonathan Sacoolas worked for the State Department at the time of the crash.

Her barrister, John McGavin, told the court he could not “completely candidly” explain why the Sacoolas family left the UK, but added: “I know the answer, but I cannot disclose it.”

Radd Seiger, a spokesperson for the Dunn family, said he was delighted to see that “common sense had prevailed” in the case.

“The Sacoolases were on the one hand arguing that the civil claim for wrongful death should be tried in the UK as that was the 'more convenient' forum, whilst at the same time arguing that she would not return to the UK to face a criminal prosecution because she fears she would not get a fair trial,” Mr Seiger said.

“Harry's parents never wanted to enter into dispute with anybody and they fundamentally believe that the way to resolve differences is with dialogue.”

Other motions submitted by Ms Sacoolas' legal team to dismiss the case will be heard on 3 March in Virginia.

Additional reporting by PA