Members of the armed forces are excluded from disability discrimination provisions while serving, but support is available.
Summary
- Members of the armed forces are excluded from the Equality Act 2010 (EqA) employment provisions on disability: below Exclusion of the armed forces.
- An employment tribunal decision that previously suggested that former members of the armed forces may be able to claim for disability discrimination which happens after discharge has now been overruled by the EAT: below Claims after discharge from armed services?
- There is a Defence Stammering Network which supports people who stammer in the armed services, military and civilian.
- Work experience in the armed forces is also excluded from disability discrimination protection. There may be some liability though in related employment services: below “Employment services” related to the armed forces.
- Ministry of Defence civilian employees, without a rank, should still fall within the EqA.
Exclusion of the armed forces
The armed forces are in principle within the EqA employment provisions: s.83(3) EqA, explained in L & Dunn v Ministry of Defence, [2025] EAT 197 at §10.
However, service in the armed forces is excluded from the EqA employment provisions on disability (EqA Sch 9 para 4(3)). Nevertheless:
- Employment as a Ministry of Defence civilian, without a rank, should still fall within the EqA.
- See below on “employment services” related to the armed forces.
The UK government has said the exclusion is
“because Armed Forces personnel need to be combat effective in order to meet a world-wide liability to deploy, and to ensure that military health and fitness remain matters for Ministry of Defence Ministers based on military advice, not for the courts.”
An amendment challenging the exclusion was resisted by the UK government in the House of Commons Committee on the Equality Bill (col 346-349, Hansard, Public Bill Cttee, 18th June 2009 (UK Parliament website)) and also in the House of Lords Committee (from col 1278 HL Hansard 25th Jan 2010 (UK Parliament website)).
In 2009 the UK government maintained its position by entering a reservation on service in the armed forces in its ratification of the UN Disability Convention – see Hansard, Statement 13th May 2009 ‘Disabled People: UN Convention’ (parliament.uk) from where the above quote is taken.
Support for stammering in the armed services
There is a Defence Stammering Network (STAMMA Defence) which is an internal network of support for stammering in the armed forces. It is open to both military and civilian employees of UK defence. See Employment stammering networks>Defence Stammering Network.
Claims after discharge from armed services?
According to current case law, the exclusion of disability discrimination claims also applies after discharge from the armed forces.
An employment tribunal in T v Ministry of Defence, 2021, had previously held that under the Human Rights Act 1998, the EqA must be re-interpreted to permit disability discrimination claims by ex-servicemen and women in respect of discrimination occuring after discharge from the armed forces. This was to comply with the European Convention on Human Rights. However, that case has now been overruled by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT):
L & Dunn v Ministry of Defence [2025] EAT 197
The EAT held that the EqA cannot be re-interpreted under s.3 Human Rights Act to permit a claim for disability discrimination which occurs after discharge from the armed forces (even if the exclusion of claims by ex-service people is a breach of the Convention, which was not decided).Such a re-interpretion would be inconsistent with the grain or thrust of the EqA. The longstanding policy of Parliament had been that the relevant disability discrimination legislation (including the DDA 1995) did not apply to service in the armed forces.
On its wording, s.108 EqA (on former workers) read with EqA Sch 9 para 4(3) excludes claims by former members of the armed forces. For example, because of Sch 9 para 4(3), the requirement in s.108(1)(b) is not met, because the relevant conduct (the alleged disability discrimination) would not have been a breach of the EqA had it occured before the claimant’s discharge from the armed forces.
So there is no claim by former members of the armed forces unless L & Dunn v Ministry of Defence is itself is overruled at some stage, or the EqA is amended.
“Employment services” related to the armed forces
Work experience in the armed forces is excluded from EqA protection as regards disability (EqA Sch 9 para 4(3)).
As well as work experience, “employment services” also include such things as careers guidance, training for employment, and employment agencies. For employment services other than work experience, EqA Sch 9 para 5 excludes some liability. The broad effect of Sch 9 para 5 seems to be:
- The armed forces would not contravene s.55(1) or (2) EqA if they show that their treatment of the claimant relates only to work, or training for work, the offer of which could be refused to the claimant in reliance on the exclusion in para 4(3), above.
- On the face of it though, except for work experience, the armed forces could still be liable for disability discrimination under s.55(3)-(7), eg for reasonable adjustments or hararassment.
Need to make “service complaint” before EqA claim
Even where an EqA claim is not excluded, if the complaint relates to an act done when the complainant was serving as a member of the armed forces, the complainant must first make a service complaint, and the complaint must not have been withdrawn: s.121 EqA. One recent case discussing s.121 is Rubery v Ministry of Defence, [2026] EWCA Civ 8, Court of Appeal. I don’t think s.121 is relevant for disability discrimination claims, but I mention it just in case.
The service complaint must sufficiently refer to the particular discrimination: Edwards v Ministry of Defence (bailii.org), [2024] EAT 18.
