The settlement between the State and Gary Coll closes one chapter in the allegations by former Air Corps technicians that they were exposed to dangerous chemicals while working on military vehicles. However, as Joe Leogue outlines, many more cases and issues of disclosure remain unresolved

A settlement on the steps of a court usually marks the conclusion of a dispute — however, the reported €2m pay-out to Defence Forces mechanic Gary Coll on Wednesday is but another development in a bitter dispute between the State and former Air Corps technicians that has raged on for over a decade.
Mr Coll settled his High Court action against the State having alleged he was exposed to various dangerous chemicals while he worked at Casement Aerodrome in Baldonnel, Dublin. The settlement was made without an admission of liability.
The State contended it provided a safe workplace at Casement, and did not allow inappropriate work practices there.
The settlement is a milestone in an ongoing saga that is complex, but at its core comes down to two simple, related, questions; did the State fail in its duty to protect scores of Defence Forces staff from the impact of harmful chemicals, and were there attempts to cover this up?
Mr Coll’s case was the first of 10 such legal actions to come to an end, with all 10 cases bearing similar complaints. The first legal claims were lodged with the High Court in 2013, and all litigants worked in repair and service workshops based in Casement Aerodrome.
All 10 say that they suffered chronic conditions including cancer and neurological problems as a direct result of their exposure to the chemicals with which they came into contact as part of their duties when servicing Air Corps aircraft.
In 2017, then in opposition, Fianna Fáil leader Micheál Martin was scathing of the report, accusing the government of knowingly appointing a reviewer who, by his own admission, was unable to meet the terms of reference of the investigation.
“It’s farcical. It seems to me there are no records of compliance with health regulations, which is very, very serious because in their absence one has to conclude that the probability is they were not complied with,” he said.
“The government needs to establish a forensic examination into this,” Mr Martin added.
“I don’t think it is acceptable to wait for court cases against the State to conclude as there is no guarantee these legal proceedings will establish what happened in the past.”
That line has proven particularly prescient eight years later. The settlement of Mr Coll’s case this week means that no evidence was heard. Nothing has yet established what has happened in the past.
This matters to the former Air Corps mechanics for many reasons. Chief among these is that since 2018 the government rejected opposition calls for a healthcare programme for these workers — similar to the Australian model — on the basis that the courts were the place to establish liability.
Read full article by Joe Leogue at the Irish Examiner
https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2025/02/05/state-agrees-2m-settlement-in-air-corps-chemical-tubbing-case/
*****