Tribunal Decision gives new hope to campaign against forced retirement at 65

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has reversed the decision in Johns vs Solent Ltd, allowing a stay to proceedings pending the decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on retirement ages in the UK.

In June this year, the Southampton Employment Tribunal struck out Mrs Johns' claim of unlawful age discrimination because she was forced to retire at 65 and denied the request to stay proceedings pending the outcome of the ECJ.

This ruling gives renewed hope to the campaign by the Heyday group. The group, backed by Age Concern, are challenging the Government's decision to permit Mandatory Retirement Ages (MRAs) which allows employers to force workers into retirement. Heydayís challenge has been referred to the European Court of Justice.

Sue Ashtiany, partner at law firm Nabarro, comments:
ìPlease donít think that it is safe to implement a mandatory retirement age of 65î, Sue Ashtiany urges employers. ìThe Judge has effectively put the case in the cupboard.î

ìThe issue of retirement age has just got interesting againî, says Sue Ashtiany. ìThe decision means that we must all now await the outcome of the Advocate Generalís opinion on the Heyday challenge. In the meantime the ruling means that we could get cupboard full of claims from people who donít want to retire at 65.î

ìThe government is interested in extending employability, so it isnít wedded to a retirement age. We must wait and see what the ECJ decides.î