Evans, R (On the Application Of) v Cheshire Constabulary

Evans, R (On the Application Of) v Cheshire Constabulary

Regulation 30(2) of the 2006 Regulations makes binding a final decision of an SMP under the 1987 Regulations as to disablement and permanence for the purposes of injury pension entitlement. The PMAB acted unlawfully by failing to treat the SMP's findings as binding and by failing to address the statutory questions...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Mark Evans; Defendant: Chief Constable of Cheshire Constabulary; Interested Party: Police Medical Appeal Board
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; decision quashed
Legal Topics
Police Pensions, Injury Awards, Statutory Interpretation, Finality of Medical Decisions
Administrative Law Pensions Law Police Pensions Injury Awards Statutory Interpretation Finality of Medical Decisions

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Evans

Claimant

Chief Constable of Cheshire Constabulary

Defendant

Police Medical Appeal Board

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Police Medical Appeal Board (PMAB) acted unlawfully by failing to treat the decision of the Selected Medical Practitioner (SMP) as final and binding under the Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006, regulation 30(2)
  2. 2 Whether the PMAB failed to address the statutory questions required under regulation 30(2)(c) and (d)
  3. 3 Whether the PMAB gave adequate reasons for its decision

Ratio Decidendi

Regulation 30(2) of the 2006 Regulations makes binding a final decision of an SMP under the 1987 Regulations as to disablement and permanence for the purposes of injury pension entitlement. The PMAB acted unlawfully by failing to treat the SMP's findings as binding and by failing to address the statutory questions of causation and degree of disablement on the basis of those findings.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; decision quashed

Orders

  • The defendant’s decision is quashed