Discrimination

Four law firms have made it into Stonewall’s Top 100 Employers list.

Authors: Spencer Keen & Richard Oulton

The Heyday litigation ended with the publication of the High Court’s judgment last month. After various name changes it now goes by the title R (on the application of Age UK) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills [2009] EWHC 2336 (Admin), [2009] All ER (D) 141(Sep).

R (on the application of Age UK) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills, [2009] EWHC 2336 (Admin)

Compulsory retirement age remains legal...but only just

More people are now potentially classed as disabled & so entitled to protection

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) is to hear a test case on whether an employee’s belief in global warning and decision to lead a carbon emission minimising life amounted to a “philosophical belief” for the purposes of the Employment Equality (Religion and Belief) Regulations 2003.

Lookism in the workplace—discrimination or a fact of life? asks Helen Crossland

In Stockton on Tees Borough Council v Aylott [2009] IRLR 548, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has given further confirmation that the restrictive test for disability-related discrimination laid down by the House of Lords in London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm [2008] 4 All ER 525 applies equally to the employment field. No surprises there then.

Pressure on the government to abandon the national default retirement age (DRA) mounted last week as a landmark case reached the High Court.