Retirement age

Case 10: The facts

Mr Seldon, a partner in a solicitors’ firm, was forced to retire under the partnership deed when he reached 65. Seldon’s claim for age discrimination failed. The tribunal found the retirement policy was a proportionate means of meeting three legitimate aims: (1) ensure associates were given the opportunity of partnership after a reasonable period; (2) facilitate forward planning; and (3) limit the need to expel partners for performance management reasons, contributing to the firm’s supportive atmosphere. Seldon appealed.

The ruling:

The EAT rejected the third aim because the tribunal had made a stereotyped assumption, not based on any evidence put before it, that performance would deteriorate at the age of 65. Further, although it was proportionate to adopt a compulsory retirement age to achieve the first two aims, the employer had not produced evidence to prove that the age of 65 was justifiable. The appeal was upheld and the case was sent back to the tribunal to decide this matter. The EAT rejected the suggestion that direct age discrimination can only be justified in exceptional cases. The test is the same as for indirect age discrimination except that, as the impact of a directly discriminatory measure is greater, this may affect whether it is proportionate.