Brown and Others v Minister of Pensions
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 19 July 1946 |
| Date | 19 July 1946 |
| Docket Number | No. 50. |
| Court | Court of Session (Inner House - Second Division) |
2ND DIVISION.
WarMilitary ServicePensions in respect of death or disablementOnus of proofMedical examination on commencement of war serviceFunction of individual members of appeal tribunalMedical member"Attributable to war service""Reasonable doubt"Royal Warrant concerning Retired Pay, Pensions, etc., dated December 1943 (Cmd. 6489), arts. 2 (2) (b) and 4.
In deciding a number of appeals against decisions of Pensions Appeal Tribunals relative to claims for pensions in respect of death or disablement by war injuries, observed by the Court:(1) Art. 4 (3)of the Royal Warrant applies only where the person in respect of whom the pension is claimed was medically examined on commencement of war serviceservice on or after 3rd September 1939and accordingly does not apply to a person who because he was already serving at that time or for some other reason had not been examined; (2) while under art. 2 (2) (b) of the Royal Warrant the Minister is bound to decide a medical question in accordance with the opinion of his medical advisers, the tribunal is not similarly bound by the advice of its medical member, no individual member of the tribunal having a right to claim part of the question under consideration as being within his peculiar province; (3) "attributable," as used in the Royal Warrant, is used in its ordinary common-sense meaning and not in a metaphysical or scientific sense, and in the case of diseases the scientific causes of which are unknown the proper inference, unless it is known that the diseases had set in before war service could have any effect, is that the Minister cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt that they were not caused by war service conditions; (4) while it is not incompetent for the tribunal to come to a decision by a vote of the majority, the fact that the chairman is in favour of entitlement, and is prepared to dissent from an opposite decision, should convince the tribunal that there is a reasonable doubt to which effect must be given.
Mrs Margaret Brown appealed by stated case to the Court of Session under the Pensions Appeal Tribunals Act, 1943, against a decision of a Pensions Appeal Tribunal refusing her a pension in respect of the death of her husband. Her case was heard along with fourteen other appeals by the Second Division, the question in each case being whether the Minister had discharged the onus which lay upon him of proving either that the death or disability under consideration had not been caused by war service or had not been aggravated thereby. Diseases under consideration were disease of the bladder, disseminated sclerosis, coronary thrombosis, duodenal ulcer, eczema, psychoneurosis, diabetes and osteo-arthritis. Each case was heard separately and decided upon its own facts, but in the course of the hearings the following general questions arose for consideration.1
(1) Does article 4 (3) of the Royal Warrant apply to a person who was not medically examined at the commencement of his war
service, either because he was on 3rd September 1939 already serving in the forces or because for some other reason(2) While under article 2 (2) (b) of the Royal Warrant the Minister is bound to decide a medical question according to the opinion of his medical advisers, is the tribunal similarly bound to adopt the opinion of its medical member?
(3) What is the meaning of the word "attributable," with special reference to diseases whose causes and origins are unknown, and to the cases of persons said to have a predisposition or inherent constitutional tendency to a disease?
(4) What is meant by the expression "reasonable doubt" in article 4 (2) of the Royal Warrant, with special reference to cases in which the decision of the tribunal is a decision by a majority, the medical member and the service member...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Millar (P's curator bonis) v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board
-
The Secretary Of State For Social Security V. K.m.
...approach being adopted as between England and Scotland. Moreover, it may be noted that in Brown and Others v. Minister of Pensions 1946 S.C. 471 this court expressly refrained from stating that it was incompetent for a Pensions Appeal Tribunal to decide by a majority. In Brain, Denning J. a......
-
Secretary of State for Social Security v M
...were not binding on the court despite the desirability of a uniform approach in England and Scotland. In Brown v Minister of PensionsSC (1946 SC 471) the Inner House had expressly refrained from stating that it was incompetent for a tribunal to decide by a majority. In Brain, Mr Justice Den......
-
Findlay v Minister of Pensions
...Reports, vol. i, p. 189;Whitt v. Minister of Pensions, Chapman's Pensions Reports, vol. i, p. 343; Brown v. Minister of PensionsSC, 1946 S. C. 471, Chapman's Pensions Reports, vol. ii, p. 3 Order by His Majesty dated 12th June 1946 (House of Commons Paper No. 151 of 1946). ...