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.
Viewing entries in
An Employment Appeal Tribunal has upheld the appeal of firefighters who disagreed with an Employment Tribunal decision that found a new pension scheme was not age discriminatory.
The EAT says that it was not age discrimination to demote a poor performing partner in a law firm.
The EAT has dismissed an appeal against an ET's decision to strike out a direct age discrimination claim.
University criteria that restricted appointment to a post was justified indirect age discrimination.
Did additional "pension strain cost" influence a decision not to make someone redundant?
The EAT found an error in the ET's reasoning when looking at justification, so remitted the case for rehearing.
The EAT overturns a decision that a teacher suffered unlawful indirect age discrimination.
This case involved a director denied the opportunity to apply for voluntary redundancy.
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".
The EAT holds that a change to new terms after a TUPE transfer was a PCP.
A salesman's knowledge that he could be dismissed at any time did not mean he suffered considerable injury to feelings after his age discriminatory termination.
An Employment Tribunal erred when it held a PhD requirement put applicants for a lecture position at a particular disadvantage
A finding of age related harassment was upheld on appeal.
An employee was dismissed 11 days before she was due to receive a pension.
It wasn't age discrimination for RBS to decline to offer a redundant employee a chance to change her mind about voluntary redundancy or redeployment.
The EAT says: don't just look at whether the decision maker discriminated - also those who might have influenced the decision maker.
This is the second EAT decision in the well known and long running case of Seldon v Clarkson Wright and Jakes.
Comment that individual was "not 25 anymore" did not taint dismissal with age discrimination.