The EAT found that a manager's dismissal of an employee, based on a belief that the employee held ageist views, did not justify an inference that the employee had been dismissed by reason of his age.
A Scottish ET 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.
This is a decision of the Scottish Division of the EAT concerning the construction of Regulation 24 of the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006.
A Scottish employment tribunal has held that an employer did not disadvantage more mature employees by including developmental needs in its selection criteria.
The ECJ rule that an Austrian law which mandated lower pay for younger civil servants was not proportionate and therefore not justified under the Framework Directive.
An appeal against the decision that use of length of service as a criterion in redundancy selection is lawful was dismissed.
This case was originally heard by an ET. An appeal against the ET's decision was heard by the EAT in July 2008.
ECJ confirms that mandatory retirement is not unlawful.
Upper age limit of 35 for recruitment of air traffic controllers held unlawful.
An age discrimination claim against BP was unsuccessful; Tribunal rules that BP does not have an "ageist" culture.
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.
A legal adviser, aged 61, ineligible for promotion unless he obtained a law degree was not discriminated against on the grounds of his age.
Despite seeking a “dynamic young accountant”, SPG was found not to have discriminated on the grounds of age in their recruitment.
Lawful use of length of service in redundancy selection criteria.
An ET rules that an enhanced redundancy scheme which gave greater credit for service over 40 was unlawful.
An employee of a UK subsidiary may only claim age discrimination under a share plan operated by an overseas parent if the overseas parent has aided and abetted an act of unlawful age discrimination by the UK subsidiary.
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.
This is the first reported age discrimination case dealing with the thorny issue of flexible benefits schemes.
Sharma v Millbrook Beds Ltd involved an employer whose attempts to reduce the risk of a claim backfired.
The youngest claimant, in Wilkinson v Springwell Engineering Ltd, was 18 when she was dismissed, ostensibly on grounds of her capability.