‘Campaigners are taking legal action against the Ministry of Defence today to demand the nation’s youngest soldiers are not forced into serving longer than adult recruits.’
The Independent, 8th October 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Anthony Korn reports on the recent judgment of First Tier Tribunal Tax Chamber in Moorthy v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (TCO3952).’
No. 5 Chambers, 19th September 2014
Source: www.no5.com
‘Caroline Jennings reviews the recent EAT case of Palmer v RBS UKEAT/0083/14 which concerns whether or not a statutory restriction on eligibility for early retirement benefits could amount to age discrimination.’
No. 5 Chambers, 19th September 2014
Source: www.no5.com
‘This talk looks at the legal and practical tools available to employment lawyers to prove or disprove direct discrimination and harassment, exploring in particular three areas:
How judges apply the burden of proof s136(2)(3) EA 2010.
What is the role of Comparators in light of the Supreme Court decision of Hewage v Grampian Health Board [2012] ICR 1054, SC.
What role does knowledge of the protected characteristic now play in light of IPC Media Ltd v Millar [2013] IRLR 707.’
Cloisters, 29th August 2014
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘Karen Henshaw stood up in court and broke into song about being forced to step down from her duties at the age of 70.’
Daily Telegraph, 8th August 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘A woman who was sexually abused by her stepfather for more than a decade will today bring a landmark legal case in an attempt to overturn rules which bar her from claiming compensation from public funds.’
Daily Telegraph, 21st May 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Britain’s biggest airport car parking company, Purple Parking, has admitted age discrimination against its workers after it sacked dozens of them for being too old.’
The Independent, 10th March 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Harini Iyengar explains the Court of Appeal’s conclusion in Jessemy v Rowstock Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 185 that victimisation of former employees remains unlawful even though “on any natural reading of the relevant provisions of the [Equality Act 2010], taken on their own and without reference to any contextual material, post-termination victimisation is not proscribed”.’
Employment Law Blog, 7th March 2014
Source: www.employment11kbw.com
Rowstock Ltd and another v Jessemey [2014] EWCA Civ 185; [2014] WLR (D) 101
‘The Court of Appeal so stated when allowing the appeal of the claimant, Mr P Jessemey, against a decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal on 5 March 2013 [2013] ICR 807 dismissing his appeal against a decision by the employment tribunal sitting at Reading to dismiss his claim against his former employer Rowstock Ltd and its director Mr Davis for victimisation pursuant to section 108 of the Equality Act 2010.’
WLR Daily, 26th February 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘In the recent police A19 test case, the Employment Tribunal unanimously found, “that the practice of requiring the retirement of nearly all officers in the Forces who could be required to retire under Regulation A19 of the Police Pensions Regulations 1987 was not a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim”, and therefore amounted to age discrimination.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 11th February 2014
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘Five police forces could face paying out millions of pounds after officers who were forced to retire after 30 years won an age discrimination claim.’
BBC News, 5th February 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Horse racing pundit John McCririck loses his age discrimination case against Channel 4 after tribunal rules he was ‘unpalatable to a wider potential audience. ‘ ”
Daily Telegraph, 13th November 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“Racing pundit John McCririck lost his job at Channel 4 because his ‘pantomime persona’ was ‘unpalatable’ to a wide audience, an employment tribunal ruled.”
BBC News, 13th November 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Article 6(2) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment applied only to retirement or invalidity benefits under an occupational social security scheme.”
WLR Daily, 26th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The principle of non-discrimination on grounds of age, enshrined in article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and given specific expression by Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, and, in particular, articles 2 and 6(1) of that Directive, did not preclude an occupational pension scheme under which an employer paid, as part of pay, pension contributions which increased with age, provided that the difference in treatment on grounds of age that arose therefrom was appropriate and necessary to achieve a legitimate aim.”
WLR Daily, 26th September 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“A regulation allowing police forces to forcibly retire officers after 30 years’
service is not unlawful, the High Court has ruled.”
BBC News, 25th July 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Employers looking to defend or reintroduce a mandatory retirement age will find ‘very little comfort’ in last week’s decision allowing a law firm to force a partner to retire at 65, an expert has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 4th June 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
“The Employment Tribunal has rejected an age discrimination claim by lawyer Leslie Seldon against his former firm Clarkson Wright & Jakes (CWJ), which had initially seemed likely to threaten law firm’s ability to enforce a compulsory retirement age for partners.”
Legal Week, 31st May 2013
Source: www.legalweek.com
“Enhanced redundancy payments made to workers over the age of 35 were not discriminatory because they reflected the extra problems older workers face when losing their jobs, a tribunal has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 7th February 2013
Source: www.out-law.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024