The EAT overturned a ruling that an employee suffered age discrimination when a younger, less qualified person was appointed to a position in a redundancy situation.
Viewing entries in
EAT
An appeal over a "shambolic" redundancy selection process fails. A terrible process does not mean that it is age discrimination.
The EAT decides that the Equality Act provides NO remedy for post termination victimisation.
This case looks at differences in severance payments on voluntary redundancy in the Civil Service between younger and older leavers.
The EAT upheld the decision of an ET that an age discrimination claim centring around the contention that a benefit payable under an insurance contract was due to terminate at 65 was "a little short of absurd"
The EAT rules that indirect age discrimination in a cost based selection procedure was justified.
58 year old production manager told "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" wins age discrimination claim on appeal.
An employee who was unfairly dismissed, had not been subjected to age discrimination.
The EAT upholds an ET decision that that an employer should consider a request to work beyond retirement “in good faith”.
A claimant lost an age discrimination claim which was based on the premise that the whole of the advertising industry is ageist.
This case concerned the statutory right to request to stay on beyond retirement age.
A retirement notice stating the employee would retire "after his 65th birthday" was not unlawful age discrimination.
The EAT looks at the recommendations of a tribunal and rules that they were not overly broad. The judgment is worth a read, particularly for the Tribunal's comments about the Lycee's argument that "being French" was justification for the discrimination.
Finding of age discrimination made on basis that witness had lied and that in those circumstances the employer could not, apparently as a matter of law, satisfy the law on the burden of proof.
The EAT rules against a serial claimant who brought multiple age discrimination claims against employers seeking "school leavers" and "recent graduates". Someone is not discriminated against if they do not even apply for a job.
In this ongoing claim, the EAT has indicated that costs alone should be able to justify age discrimination.
The EAT upheld an ET's decision that a 42-year-old banker had suffered unlawful age discrimination because of a bank's use of the word "younger".
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.
A litigant bringing frivolous age discrimination claims has her appeal dismissed and costs awarded against her.
Barking and Dagenham Council loses appeal after 15 employees bring age discrimination claim.