Police Superintendents' Association, R (On the Application Of) v The Police Remuneration Review Body & Anor [2023] EWHC 1838 (Admin) (19 July 2023)

Police Superintendents' Association, R (On the Application Of) v The Police Remuneration Review Body & Anor [2023] EWHC 1838 (Admin) (19 July 2023)

There was no breach of the Public Sector Equality Duty by either the Review Body or the Home Secretary. The flat-rate pay increase and its differential impact by age and rank were acknowledged, considered, and justified in the Review Body's report and the Home Secretary's acceptance. The process satisfied the PSED in substance. While the Home Secretary should have disclosed the Ministerial Submissions as best evidence, the information provided was sufficient for the court to determine that the PSED was complied with. The claim had no realistic prospect of success.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1838 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Police Superintendents' Association; First Defendant: Police Remuneration Review Body; Second Defendant: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Permission Stage Judgment
Outcome
Permission for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Public Sector Equality Duty, Police Pay, Judicial Review—duty of Candour, Indirect Discrimination—age, Disclosure in Judicial Review
Administrative Law Employment Law Equality Law Public Sector Equality Duty Police Pay Judicial Review—duty of Candour Indirect Discrimination—age Disclosure in Judicial Review

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Police Superintendents' Association

Claimant

Police Remuneration Review Body

First Defendant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Permission Stage Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Police Remuneration Review Body and the Home Secretary breached the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) in recommending and accepting a flat-rate police pay increase
  2. 2 Whether the Home Secretary complied with the duty of candour in judicial review proceedings by disclosing only the 'substance' of Ministerial Submissions rather than the documents themselves
  3. 3 Whether the claim was brought with sufficient promptness and without undue delay

Ratio Decidendi

There was no breach of the Public Sector Equality Duty by either the Review Body or the Home Secretary. The flat-rate pay increase and its differential impact by age and rank were acknowledged, considered, and justified in the Review Body's report and the Home Secretary's acceptance. The process satisfied the PSED in substance. While the Home Secretary should have disclosed the Ministerial Submissions as best evidence, the information provided was sufficient for the court to determine that the PSED was complied with. The claim had no realistic prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Permission for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Permission for judicial review is refused as the claim is unarguable on its merits.