Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Latest NewsEmployment law

Age discrimination warning after partner wrongly forced to retire at 65

by Louisa Peacock 22 Dec 2008
by Louisa Peacock 22 Dec 2008

Age discrimination law and the default retirement age has been thrown back into the spotlight after an employment appeal tribunal (EAT) ruling, weeks before the final decision on Heyday is expected.

An EAT last week ruled that Leslie Seldon, a former senior partner at law firm Clarkson, Wright and Jakes, was wrongly forced to retire at 65, because of a discriminatory assumption that his work had “dropped off” since passing the default retirement age.
Under age discrimination laws introduced in 2006, partners are excluded from the default retirement age, but can be justifiably made to retire at 65 to achieve business aims – for example, to aid workforce planning.

However, while the original employment tribunal ruled in the Kent-based law firm’s favour, the EAT judge rejected Clarkson’s argument that partners should be retired at 65 because their performance reduced from that age.

Justice Elias said “there was no evidential basis for that assumption”. He remitted the case back to the original tribunal to assess whether there were other reasons which could justify their retirement age of 65.

Schona Jolly, employment and discrimination barrister at Cloisters, said: “This decision, concerning the compulsory retirement of partners from a solicitors’ practice, provides welcome guidance on the need for tribunals to avoid making age stereotypical assumptions about those reaching retirement age.

“In particular, it ought to warn employers off from making unfounded assumptions that a person’s work performance drops away at around age 65.”

Meanwhile employers are eagerly awaiting the final European Court of Justice (ECJ) decision regarding the Heyday case, which challenages the default retirement age for all employees, expected in early 2009. The ECJ’s advocate general ruled against the charity’s challenge earlier this year.

Although not binding, the advocate general’s opinion may be an indication of the ECJ’s decision, expected early next year.

 

Avatar
Louisa Peacock

previous post
Security staff wages and conditions to be improved after union deal
next post
Toyota losses trigger redundancy fears

You may also like

Labour pledges small business menopause guidance

27 Sep 2023

Keeping up with global regulations foxes HR

27 Sep 2023

Tesco introduces paid leave for kinship carers

27 Sep 2023

Introduce three-day week for over 50s, says former...

26 Sep 2023

Ralph Lauren stylist ‘traumatised’ by racial comments

26 Sep 2023

Government expands Youth Offer employment support

26 Sep 2023

Few dyslexic thinkers feel employer knows their strengths

26 Sep 2023

Sickness absence rates soar to 10-year high

26 Sep 2023

Personnel Today Awards 2023 shortlist: Family Friendly Employer...

26 Sep 2023

Three days in office is optimal hybrid working...

25 Sep 2023

  • Discover the value of CIPD accreditation PROMOTED | See how the CIPD can increase your earning potential...Read more
  • What does it mean to be an HR professional in 2024? (survey) PROMOTED | The world of HR is changing rapidly...Read more
  • The Contractor Management Mastery Pack: Everything you need to manage and pay global contractors PROMOTED | Answers to cross-border...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2023

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2023 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+