In this case a police officer suffering from PTSD as a result of his police work was ill-health retired by the Chief Constable. In doing so the Chief Constable relied on medical evidence from a consultant psychiatrist, the force medical advisor, and a Selected Medical Practitioner to the effect that working in policing was harmful to his recovery. The SMP had assessed him as permanently unfit for the duties of a police officer, currently unfit for regular employment, but likely to be fit for regular employment in the future. The report stated that there were no adjustments which would enable a return to work.
The officer had also been asked following receipt of the medical evidence whether he wished to be retired or retained in some other capacity. His response was the since the medical evidence demonstrated that he would not recover whilst working for the police force, he wanted to be retired.
Having been retired in accordance with his request, the officer then brought a claim of discrimination arising from disability in the employment tribunal on the basis his dismissal was unfavourable treatment and was not justifiable as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim when no attempt had been made to find him alternative employment in the police.
Employment Judge Lancaster held that whilst the dismissal of the Claimant was unfavourable treatment, that unfavourable treatment was justified by the legitimate aim of protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the Claimant. Retaining him with the aim of identifying alternative work in a policing environment when the medical evidence was that this would be detrimental would not have been proportionate. Accordingly the defence of justification was held to have been made out and the Claim was dismissed.
Daniel comments:
“This case highlights again the importance of the well known comments made by Baroness Hale in Essop and Naeem, that justification is an important part of the test for unlawful discrimination, and that there is no “ shadow or stigma… no shame” in putting forward a justification defence where there is good reason for it. Police forces act in the public interest, and there is no shame in defending that interest where it gives rise to consequences that might otherwise be discriminatory.”
For further information, advice, or to instruct Daniel, please contact the clerks on clerks@kbwchambers.com or 01132 971 200.