The ECJ has held that a collective agreement prohibiting airline pilots from working after the age of 60 is incompatible with EU law and constitutes age discrimination.

A decision to dismiss a 49 year old three months before his 50th birthday in order to avoid additional pension costs was direct age discrimination.

This ECJ decision appears to suggest that costs alone will not be sufficient to justify discrimination

The EAT upholds an Employment Tribunal decision that that an employer should consider a request to work beyond retirement “in good faith”.

This case concerned the statutory right to request to stay on beyond retire age and in particular paragraphs 2 and 5 of Schedule 6 of the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006.

The EAT finds that a retirement notice stating the employee would retire "after his 65th birthday" complied with s98ZG of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and under Regulation 30 it was not unlawful age discrimination.

The ECJ rules that a default retirement provision in the Bulgarian Labour Code may be justified.

The ECJ has held that a German law allowing compulsory retirement at 65 (state pension age) was justified age discrimination.

The ECJ rules that a Danish law providing for severance payments for employees, but which excluded those who had attained pension age, constituted direct age discrimination which could not be justified.

The Court of Appeal rules that a partnership of solicitors can force partners to retire at 65.

In this interesting ET decision, Mrs Duggan came up with a creative argument to get around the default retirement age.

This is the sort of claim that employers may face when they no longer have the protection of being able to retire employees under the default retirement age exemption, which is being phased out from 6 April 2011.

The EAT has confirmed that applying a cap to payments under a redundancy scheme to ensure that employees close to pension age do not receive a windfall can be justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

An employment tribunal holds that the duty to consider procedure in the Age Regulations requires an employer to genuinely consider an employee's request to work beyond retirement.

The Employment Tribunal rules that a retirement age of 48 for match officials is direct age discrimination.

The ECJ has given their judgement on a German law setting a maximum age limit of 68 for dentists to be accredited to work in the German national health service.

The High Court has today given judgment on R (on the application of Age UK) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills [2009] EWHC 2336 (Admin) – known as the “Heyday” case.

A Scottish employment tribunal has considered the level of compensation to be awarded when an employer does not give notice of intended retirement to an employee within the required timescales.

ECJ confirms that mandatory retirement is not unlawful.

The EAT rejects a law firm's claim that it is legitimate to retire partners at 65 as their performance declines at about that age.

Following the Court of Appeal’s decision in the case of Johns v Solent all tribunal claims challenging a compulsory retirement will be stayed pending the outcome of the ‘Heyday’ case

The European Court of Justice has decided that national laws on compulsory retirement at a particular age must be justified in order to be lawful.

The Advocate General has given an opinion stating that the compulsory retirement age of 65 in the Age Discrimination Regulations is potentially legal under EU law.

The old statutory retirement procedure which, if correctly followed, would protect an employer from unfair dismissal and/or age discrimination claims, only applies to employees.

An employee dismissed one day before his 65th birthday succeeded in his age discrimination claim.

Cleaner in a Dentist's is successful in her age discrimination claim