In this case, the Court of Appeal ruled that a good leaver provision in an LTIP could be objectively justified on the basis that the employer wished to achieve intergenerational fairness and consistency, reward experience and loyalty, and ensure a mix of generations of staff.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal has dismissed an appeal by the Government against a decision that transitional provisions in a judicial pension scheme were unlawfully discriminatory.

A Tribunal accepted that comments made by a General Manager that “old workers like old football players need to leave so that it could bring in new blood otherwise the team would not be efficient” were age discrimination.

There was no finding of age discrimination after bar and waiting staff were replaced with new ones that better fit a "modern and trendy" image.

This case is a reminder that, when justifying age discrimination, evidence that there are no less discriminatory alternatives is important to show proportionality.

The ECJ has held that EU law setting an age limit of 65 years old for pilots was not age discriminatory and was justified.

A Tribunal dismissed a claim of age discrimination was dismissed after holding that, because of uncertainty about the Claimant's real age, the employer could not have known their age when terminating her.

An Employment Tribunal has held that describing someone as “better suited to a traditional estate agency” was a reference to someone's age, and was therefore direct age discrimination.

The Court of Appeal says that it was not discrimination to force Police Officers to retire.

Italian law requires "on call contracts" (zero hours contracts) to be subject to objective conditions, unless the worker is either under 25 years of age or over 45 years of age. This case considered whether this law is age discriminatory.

An employment tribunal has ruled in favour of 200 judges whose pension entitlements were cut and found unjustified age discrimination.

The ECJ has ruled that a police force was justified in setting an age limit of 35 years old for new recruits.

The ECJ says that a national court must disapply principles of national law that conflict with the general principle of EU law prohibiting age discrimination, and cannot prioritise principles of legal certainty or legitimate expectations instead.

The EAT has dismissed an appeal against an ET's decision to strike out a direct age discrimination claim.