Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • 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
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • 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
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Age discriminationVexatious claimsEmployment lawEquality, diversity and inclusionEmployment tribunals

Serial litigant’s age discrimination case thrown out of appeals court

by Kat Baker 9 Mar 2010
by Kat Baker 9 Mar 2010

Serial litigants have been dealt a blow after a tribunal ruled job applications must be genuine before a claimant can suffer statutory discrimination.


The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled in the case of Keane v Investigo and others that Margaret Keane had not suffered age discrimination after her applications for positions â€“ which she was over-qualified for – were rejected because she had not genuinely wanted the jobs.


Keane, who is 51 years old, was found to have sought out jobs being advertised for ‘newly qualified’ accountants, despite having several years’ experience.


The claimant said she filed the claims to make a stand against age discrimination, but this was rejected after it was found she had made settlements on up to half of the claims.


Keane applied for at least 20 positions which were too junior for her, and made £100,000 from settling claims with up to 12 businesses.


The EAT ruled since Keane was not interested in taking the job if offered, she had not suffered discrimination.


Cathy Hoar, an employment associate at law firm Adams and Remers, said the case would act as “a deterrent” for vexatious claimants.


She told Personnel Today: “It will give employers a bit more strength in responding to and dealing with claims where there is a suggestion that someone is unlikely to want the job.


“It makes it clear that for someone to bring a claim and succeed, they have to be a genuine applicant.”


But Hoar warned employers that in the current economic climate, jobseekers would be making genuine applications for positions they were over-qualified for, and these applications should not immediately be seen as vexatious.


Keane could not adequately explain why she wanted a job aimed at someone with little or no experience, and had sent a questionnaire under the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 asking for details of the alleged discriminatory treatment before she knew whether she had been rejected.


She also submitted identical CVs and cover letters for all the applications, and declined an offer from one agency to explore more suitable roles.


Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

John Read, an employment law editor at XpertHR, said the EAT’s decision was “common sense”.


He said: “This decision is a reminder to employers that, when faced with a litigant like Keane, they can succeed if they can convince a tribunal â€“ on balance of probabilities – that the job application isn’t genuine.”

Kat Baker

previous post
Morrisons targets school pupils in bid to promote retail careers
next post
Christian registrar Ladele loses right to appeal in Supreme Court in gay weddings case

You may also like

Fire and rehire: the relocation question

22 May 2025

Restaurant tips should be included in holiday pay

21 May 2025

Fewer workers would comply with a return-to-office mandate

21 May 2025

Redefining leadership: From competence to inclusion

21 May 2025

Consultation launched after Supreme Court ‘sex’ ruling

20 May 2025

Black security manager awarded £360k after decade of...

20 May 2025

Minister defends Employment Rights Bill at Acas conference

16 May 2025

CBI chair Soames accuses ministers of not listening...

16 May 2025

Union rep teacher awarded £370k for unfair dismissal

15 May 2025

EHRC bows to pressure and extends gender consultation

15 May 2025

  • 2025 Employee Communications Report PROMOTED | HR and leadership...Read more
  • The Majority of Employees Have Their Eyes on Their Next Move PROMOTED | A staggering 65%...Read more
  • Prioritising performance management: Strategies for success (webinar) WEBINAR | In today’s fast-paced...Read more
  • Self-Leadership: The Key to Successful Organisations PROMOTED | Eletive is helping businesses...Read more
  • Retaining Female Talent: Four Ways to Reduce Workplace Drop Out PROMOTED | International Women’s Day...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 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • 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
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+