Ministry of Justice urged to rethink ill-health retirement processes

Justice Secretary David Gauke should rethink his department’s approach to ill-health retirement, senior judges have suggested.

Two Court of Appeal judges said on Tuesday that the Ministry of Justice’s “ill-health retirement processes” were “arcane and unwieldy” and “deficient”.

Lord Justice Underhill and Lord Justice Holroyde said they should be reconsidered.

They raised concern in a ruling in a case in which former prison inspector Dr Peter Dunn complained about the way he had been treated by bosses after suffering depression and a heart problem.

He had taken legal action and alleged disability discrimination and harassment.

The two appeal judges, who had analysed issues at a Court of Appeal hearing in London in May, ruled against him.

But Lord Justice Underhill said, in a written ruling: “It is no credit whatever to the Ministry of Justice that its ill-health retirement processes, which by definition are applied to people who are to a greater or lesser extent vulnerable, are so … arcane and unwieldy.”

He said they should be reviewed, but added: “It does not follow from the fact that they are so deficient that they are also discriminatory.”

Lord Justice Holroyde said he agreed.

Dr Dunn had won an initial round of his legal fight.

An employment tribunal had upheld some of his discrimination claims and awarded around £100,000 compensation.

Lawyers representing Home Office ministers had subsequently mounted an appeal.