Retirement
We look at three employment tribunal cases in which employers were held to have discriminated against employees because their age was a factor in their dismissal.
In Pitcher v Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford and another, an employment tribunal held that Oxford University's "employer-justified retirement age" for academics is a proportionate means of achieving its legitimate aims.
The Court of Appeal has held that the decision to reduce officer head count "to the fullest extent" by forcibly retiring police officers with 30 years' service was justified.
In the final chapter of this long-running case on the justification of a compulsory retirement age for partners in a law firm, the employment tribunal applied Supreme Court guidance and concluded that a requirement for partners to step down at 65 was justified.
The European Court of Justice has upheld the Swedish law that allows an employer to terminate an employee's contract of employment on the sole ground that he or she has reached the age of 67, taking no account of the pension that the employee will receive.
The Supreme Court has provided guidance on the components needed to justify a compulsory retirement age, stressing that the chosen retirement age has to be appropriate and necessary in that particular business. It went on to say that, once a retirement age is justified for a workplace or group of workers, the employer does not have to justify every retirement on an individual basis.
The Supreme Court has held that a requirement that employees obtain a law degree before they could be promoted to the highest grade was indirect age discrimination against the claimant, who did not have enough time to complete a degree before he reached the employer's retirement age. However, it sent the case back to the employment tribunal to decide whether or not the employer's actions were justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
The European Court of Justice has held that a rule in a collective agreement applicable to the crew of the German airline Deutsche Lufthansa prohibiting pilots from flying after the age of 60 is discriminatory on the ground of age.
The European Court of Justice has held that German legislation that requires civil servants to retire at 65 can be justified if "appropriate and necessary" means are used to achieve the aim of balancing the employment levels of young and older civil servants to encourage the recruitment and promotion of young people. It also stressed that budgetary considerations cannot by themselves constitute a legitimate aim in relation to a member state's social policy.
Claire Benson is managing associate and Helen Corbett, Sinead Jones, Helen Ward and Tori O'Neil are associates at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to retirement.