Two former servicemen have threatened legal action against the Ministry of Defence over the design of the government’s LGBT+ Veterans Financial Recognition scheme, arguing that its eligibility rules unlawfully exclude certain ranks from full compensation. The dispute centres on reparations for those affected by the ban on LGBT personnel serving in the armed forces, which remained in force until 2000.
Mark Shephard and Steven Stewart have issued a pre-action letter challenging the lawfulness of the scheme, introduced following a landmark review into the treatment of LGBT veterans. Under the current framework, individuals dismissed or discharged because of their sexuality can apply for a £50,000 payment, with up to £20,000 additional compensation available where there were aggravating factors such as criminal records or abusive questioning. However, the scheme distinguishes between commissioned officers and non-commissioned ranks in cases where personnel resigned under threat of disciplinary action rather than being formally dismissed.
Commissioned officers who felt compelled to leave qualify for the £50,000 payment, whereas non-commissioned personnel who resigned in similar circumstances do not. Lawyers representing the veterans argue that this differentiation fails to operate fairly between individuals of differing rank and does not adequately recognise constructive dismissal. Around 40 veterans have reportedly been rejected under the current criteria, with legal representatives suggesting that the rules may exclude thousands more.
The ban, in place from 1967 to 2000, subjected gay or perceived gay personnel to investigations, dishonourable discharge and, in some instances, imprisonment. Shephard, a former RAF fitter, says he was questioned about his sexuality in 1999 and presented with the option of dismissal or resignation. Stewart, a former Royal Military Police corporal, left the Army in 1995 after what he describes as an intrusive investigation.
The Ministry of Defence has previously expressed deep regret for the treatment of LGBT service personnel and pledged to accelerate payments amid criticism over delays, including reports that some eligible veterans have died awaiting compensation. The threatened judicial review raises further questions over whether the scheme fully reflects the scope of past discrimination it was designed to address.
