LGBT veterans compensation scheme, USA News (London): Veterans have won the first stage of their legal battle over the Ministry of Defence (MoD)’s “unfair and irrational” compensation scheme. Steven Stewart, 55, and Mark Shephard, 49, were “forced to resign” from the armed forces because of their sexuality or perceived sexuality. A ban on LGBT+ personnel was in place between 1967 and 2000, meaning that those thought to be gay or transgender faced interrogation and dismissal. As a result of their resignations, they were eligible for the LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme, set up by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) in 2024.
Mr Stewart and Mr Shephard received £7,000 and £5,000 respectively, but had their applications for a larger payment refused because they were not formally dismissed or discharged. Last week, Defence Secretary Wes Streeting told The Guardian the MoD was looking to resolve the case with a “way forward that doesn’t require legal action.” But on Wednesday, a judge ruled the two men could take their claim for further compensation to a full hearing, likely to take place in January.
Mrs Justice Eady said: “I am persuaded this is a matter that warrants further consideration by the court.” Under the current scheme, claimants can receive a flat-rate payment of £50,000 if a veteran was dismissed or administratively discharged in the ban. Or, if affected by the ban, LGBT+ veterans can receive “impact payments” of up to £20,000.
Legal Arguments and Personal Accounts
Isabelle Agerbak, representing the two men, argued that this means those dismissed are eligible for up to £70,000, while those who resigned after an ultimatum are eligible for up to £20,000. The court heard how Mr Stewart, from the South West, served as a corporal in the Royal Military Police from 1988 until 1995. He was told that “incriminating letters” had been found as he was “stripped of his duty pistol and escorted into the office of his commander”.
He was interviewed under caution and resigned after being told he would face a court-martial and potential prison sentence. Mr Stewart said: “Leaving under those circumstances was devastating. My military career ended overnight. The impact of that decision has stayed with me ever since. I rebuilt my life, but what happened has stayed with me for nearly three decades. It affected my confidence, my relationships and how I saw myself.”
Mr Shephard, from Taunton, Somerset, served in the Royal Air Force from 1995, but in 1999 he broke down in front of his commanding officer after persistent bullying and told her he was gay, as he was unaware of the ban at the time. He later applied to leave the Army after being told he would otherwise be summarily dismissed. Mr Shephard said he was “driven out of the career I trained hard to achieve and excelled at” and had only recently told his friends and family the real reason he left the RAF.
Ministry of Defence Position
In written submissions, Ms Agerbak said the scheme is “irrational and unfair”. She said: “It is entirely unclear how and why the defendant arrived at an outcome whereby those who were compelled to resign would be eligible for tens of thousands of pounds less than those with similar experiences, but who were dismissed or discharged.”
Amanda Jones, for the MoD, said the claim is “not arguable”, adding the scheme had a “limited total budget” and was set up to “mark and alleviate harm”, but did not concede any legal liability. She said £75million has been spent on the scheme and that making it available to those who were forced to resign would result in “a very significant additional sum”. She said claimants who resigned rather than were dismissed benefited, including receiving a positive employment reference and not having to repay a £4,000 bonus. It is estimated that around 200 to 250 military personnel left the service each year as a result of the LGBT+ ban.
