An Employment Tribunal has found that the University of Oxford’s policy of mandatory retirement at 68 years old could not be justified.
Viewing entries tagged
Retirement
A claim for direct age discrimination in relation to a ‘pension age cap’ policy in a voluntary redundancy payment succeeded.
There was no age discrimination when a bird keeper was dismissed after a meeting in which retirement was described as “a lovely option”.
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 63 year old Director of a law firm whose retirement was referred to as “the elephant in the room” had not been subjected to direct age discrimination.
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.
Various references to an individual's age during a process to dismiss him were age discrimination.
The EAT found an error in the ET's reasoning when looking at justification, so remitted the case for rehearing.
EAT says the 'A19' policy which forced police officers to retire was not age discrimination.
Can a company claim it has suffered age discrimination. The EAT says "yes".
This case relates to the retirement age for cricket officials.
A retirement age of 70 years old for judges was objectively justified.
This is the second EAT decision in the well known and long running case of Seldon v Clarkson Wright and Jakes.
The Court of Appeal clarifies an important point of law: post employment victimisation IS covered by the Equality Act 2010.
This is a test case in relation to police compulsory retirement under the A19 procedure.
An appeal over a "shambolic" redundancy selection process fails. A terrible process does not mean that it is age discrimination.
An ET upholds a Parking Adjudicator's age discrimination claim over his retirement.