Fisher, R (on the application of) v The Chief Constable of Northumbria & Anor

Fisher, R (on the application of) v The Chief Constable of Northumbria & Anor

The Board erred in failing to consider and explain the use of the Claimant’s police earnings as the uninjured comparator and in failing to give reasons for disregarding them. The Board’s decision on the uninjured earnings comparator was unreasoned and cannot stand. Any alteration to the pension must take effect from the date of the Board’s decision, not the earlier date of the SMP’s report.

Parties
Claimant: Stanley John Fisher; First Defendant: Chief Constable of Northumbria; Second Defendant: Police Medical Appeal Board
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim allowed in part
Legal Topics
Police Injury Pensions, Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions, Statutory Interpretation, Backdating of Pension Awards
Administrative Law Pensions Law Police Injury Pensions Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions Statutory Interpretation Backdating of Pension Awards

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stanley John Fisher

Claimant

Chief Constable of Northumbria

First Defendant

Police Medical Appeal Board

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Police Medical Appeal Board erred in its approach to the uninjured earnings comparator for injury pension calculation
  2. 2 Whether the Board erred in its assessment of injured earning capacity by reference to inappropriate comparator jobs
  3. 3 Whether the Board erred in using midpoint salaries for injured earning capacity

Ratio Decidendi

The Board erred in failing to consider and explain the use of the Claimant’s police earnings as the uninjured comparator and in failing to give reasons for disregarding them. The Board’s decision on the uninjured earnings comparator was unreasoned and cannot stand. Any alteration to the pension must take effect from the date of the Board’s decision, not the earlier date of the SMP’s report.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part

Orders

  • The decision of the Police Medical Appeal Board is quashed and remitted for reconsideration in accordance with the judgment.
  • The decision of the Chief Constable to backdate the pension reduction is quashed; any alteration must run from the date of the Board’s decision.