Ambiguities in health questionnaires are likely to be resolved in the employee’s favour,
says Charles Pigott
The trial judge’s outline of the facts in Cheltenham Borough Council v Laird [2009] EWHC 1253, [2009] All ER (D) 188 (Jun) starts with a quote from the council’s recruitment literature, praising the attractions of Cheltenham’s gracious architecture and thriving cultural life.
Presumably it was intended to form an ironic backdrop to his 50,000-word judgment chronicling a long —and far from gracious—battle between the council and its former chief executive.
Ms Laird’s employment with the council started in early 2002 and ended, after almost continuous disputes and litigation, in 2005. Ms Laird’s health was increasingly under pressure, but finally broke down when she passed out with a particularly severe panic attack on being told she had been suspended.
She was later found to be eligible for early retirement on health grounds.
The medical evidence submitted on Ms Laird’s behalf demonstrated that she had previously suffered from depression. That prompted the council to apply for disclosure of her pre-employment health questionnaire, which had resulted in her being declared
