Your World of Legal Intelligence
 United Kingdom | +44 (0) 20 7284 8080

Claims for Disablement or Death within 7 Years of Termination of Service - Article 40 of the SPO 2006

Document Cited authorities 9 Cited in Related
AuthorAndrew Bano
Pages27-31

Chapter 4


Claims for Disablement or Death within
7 Years of Termination of Service – Article 40 of the SPO 2006

ARTICLE 40 BURDEN AND STANDARD OF PROOF
4.1 The Royal Warrant of 4 December 1943 removed the previous requirement for a claimant to show by ‘good and sufficient evidence that his disability was in fact attributable to war service’. Article 4(2) of the 1943 Warrant stipulated that ‘in no case shall there be an onus on any claimant to prove the fulfilment of the prescribed conditions’, and that ‘the benefit of any reasonable doubt shall be given to the claimant’. Those provisions are now contained in article 40(3) of the SPO 2006, which applies to all claims in respect of disablement made no later than 7 years after the termination of service and to claims in respect of deaths within that period, whenever the claim in respect of the death is made.1It also applies to ‘deemed’ claims under article 35.2

4.2 In Starr v Minister of Pensions,3Denning J summarised the effect of article 4(2) of the 1943 Warrant4as follows:

There is, therefore, now no burden on any claimant to produce evidence. He must of course make his claim ... The claimant may adduce any evidence he wishes, and the Minister may submit any medical question to a medical officer ... He may be able to come to a determinate conclusion without reasonable doubt, but, if the evidence leaves him in reasonable doubt, then the claimant must be given the benefit of the doubt. This means that he must not decide against the claimant on a mere balance of probabilities.

1SPO 2006, art 40(1).

2See para 2.11.

3[1946] 1 KB 345, (1945) 1 WPAR 109.

4Now SPO 2006, art 40(3).

28 War Pensions and Armed Forces Compensation – Law and Practice

There must be a real preponderance of probability against him such as to exclude reasonable doubt. That is a rule as to the weight of evidence, which applies to all cases.

In Secretary of State for Defence v NM (WP),5Judge Rowland held that article 40 is relevant both to the question of whether an incident was a service cause of an injury, and also to whether the injury was the cause of the claimed disablement.

4.3 Despite some authorities6indicating that the standard of proof needed to disprove a claim was proof on the balance of probabilities (i.e. the normal civil standard of proof), in Judd v Minister of Pensions,7Edmund Davies J held that in a claim under what is now article 40 of the SPO 2006 the Secretary of State must show beyond reasonable...

To continue reading

Request your trial
Navigation index

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT