Police officer removed a decade after a false medical declaration

What happened

Mr Little was a police officer in England from 2008 to 2013. In early 2013 he applied to join the WA Police Force. He graduated from the Police Academy in January 2014 and later worked as a patrol and enquiry officer at Wanneroo.

As a child he had surgery on his neck. By his teens he had pain and stiffness in his upper back and left shoulder, and it worsened over the years. In October 2012, a few months before applying to WA Police, he signed a witness statement for a negligence claim against the National Health Service (NHS) in England over that childhood surgery. In it he said he was "struggling as a police officer" because of the pain.

The WA application included a health assessment form. Mr Little answered no when asked whether he had ever had a musculoskeletal problem, including of the shoulder, whether any health problem restricted his daily activities, and whether any injury might affect his police duties. The only surgery he listed was for varicose veins. He signed a declaration that a false or deficient answer could lead to his dismissal.

How it came to light

In late 2018 he told colleagues he had been taking strong pain medication. He told one of them, an acting sergeant, that he had been on it for years and had a compensation claim running in the United Kingdom, and she reported it to the officer in charge of his station. In 2018 he received payments totalling $528,769.34, which he did not dispute were the settlement of his NHS claim.

The Commissioner's investigation found the NHS claim papers. In one, Mr Little wrote about the doctor who examined him for the move to Australia: he "did not want to lose the chance to go to Australia". His wife's statement said he would do "anything and everything to get through the application process".

There was also a mango tree. In September 2017, on holiday in Queensland, he was stranded eight metres up a tree and dislocated his right shoulder, and it took more than an hour to get him down. Yet the NHS claim stressed he could no longer climb. His signed February 2018 statement for the claim did not mention the tree. It did describe him dislocating his right shoulder by tripping over at home.

In 2023 the Commissioner removed him from the Police Force, saying he had acted dishonestly in his application and had misled the NHS, WA Police, or both, about his health.

The legal test

Police officers are not dismissed like other employees. Under Part IIB of the Police Act 1892 (WA), the Commissioner can remove an officer when he has lost confidence in the officer's suitability to continue, having regard (under s 33L) to their integrity, honesty, competence, performance or conduct. The Commission stressed that removal is not a punishment: it exists to maintain standards and protect the Force's reputation and the community.

Under s 33P the officer can appeal to the WAIRC on the ground that the removal was harsh, oppressive or unfair. Under s 33Q, the officer carries the burden of proving that. The Commission asks whether there was a logical and sound basis for the Commissioner's view, without stepping into his shoes to make the decision itself. It must also weigh the officer's interests against the public interest, which includes public confidence in police honesty and the special relationship between the Commissioner and his officers.

What the Commission decided

Mr Little argued that the form was ambiguous, that he had sent medical reports giving the full picture, and that he had served well for years. The Commission rejected each point. It found the questions clear, and said the declaration he signed was false.

The medical reports did not help him either. A hospital discharge letter had said he had made a full recovery, but his own claim papers later disowned that picture. As an experienced officer who had prepared prosecution briefs, he could not say the form confused him. The lack of honesty "tainted the appellant's appointment from the very beginning".

On the NHS claim, the Commission said the mango tree incident alone was enough to support the conclusion that he actively misled the NHS. It also held that under the workplace safety law then in force he should have reported that his condition might stop him doing the job safely. Instead, he actively concealed it.

His complaints about procedural fairness failed because nothing he raised could have changed the outcome. On the public interest, the Commission said the Commissioner must be able to rely on officers being honest at all times, not only with the public. Ten years in WA, 15 in all, could not outweigh that. The appeal was dismissed.

What this means for you

If you are completing a pre-employment medical questionnaire, answer every question fully and honestly, including past conditions you believe are now under control. Explain the context in the space given rather than ticking no. An untrue answer can be raised years later, long after you have proved you can do the job.

WA police and prison officers have their own removal and appeal rules, with their own tests. A WA police officer has 28 days after the day of removal to appeal to the WAIRC (s 33P(3) of the Police Act 1892 (WA)). If you have been told the Commissioner has lost confidence in you, it is worth getting advice early.