Key Facts
- •Nicola Clark and Michaela Bell, former police officers, were injured on duty and became totally and permanently disabled after the 12-month period stipulated in the Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006 (the 2006 Regulations).
- •They were denied a disablement gratuity under regulation 12 of the 2006 Regulations due to the timing of their disablement.
- •They claimed this constituted disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 (the 2010 Act).
- •The Employment Tribunal initially held it had jurisdiction under section 61 of the 2010 Act (occupational pension schemes), but this was overturned by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).
- •The Court of Appeal considered whether the EAT was correct and whether jurisdiction existed under section 108 of the 2010 Act (relationships that have ended).
Legal Principles
Definition of 'occupational pension scheme' under section 1 of the Pension Schemes Act 1993.
Pension Schemes Act 1993
Jurisdiction of Employment Tribunals to determine discrimination complaints under section 120 of the Equality Act 2010.
Equality Act 2010
Prohibition of discrimination arising from relationships that have ended under section 108 of the Equality Act 2010.
Equality Act 2010
Interpretation of statutes, considering statutory language, context, purpose, and legitimate aids to construction.
Case law (various cases cited)
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
The Court of Appeal held that the Employment Tribunal had jurisdiction under section 108 of the 2010 Act, not section 61 as the EAT had determined.
Ground 1 (interpretation of 'occupational pension scheme') failed.
Regulation 12 of the 2006 Regulations does not provide for benefits 'on' retirement or termination of service, a key requirement for an occupational pension scheme.
Ground 3 (application of section 108) succeeded.
The alleged discrimination arose out of and was closely connected to the employment relationship, and the conduct would have contravened the 2010 Act if it occurred during the relationship.