header-logo header-logo

Forced out

22 November 2007 / Juliet Carp
Issue: 7298 / Categories: Features , EU , Employment
printer mail-detail

Should UK employers ditch compulsory retirement? asks Juliet Carp

UK employers and lawyers are considering the impact of the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ’s) decision that compulsory retirement at 65 is allowed in Spain (see Palacios de la Villa v Cortefiel Servicios SA: C-411/05 [2007] All ER (D) 207 (Oct)).

The Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/1031) (the regulations) were introduced to comply with an EC Directive prohibiting age discrimination (Council Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (the Directive)) and allow compulsory retirement if a specified procedure is followed.
The Palacios decision follows another high-profile age discrimination decision—a UK employment tribunal recently decided in Bloxham v Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (July 2007 Central London Employment Tribunal) that City law firm Freshfields could justify its decision to re-organise pension arrangements to the detriment of some older partners (see NLJ, 2 November 2007, pp 1526–27).

The UK compulsory retirement provisions are being challenged by Heyday, a group connected to the charity Age Concern, and questions have been submitted to the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kennedys—Samson Spanier

Kennedys—Samson Spanier

Commercial disputes practice bolstered by partner hire

Bird & Bird—Emma Radcliffe

Bird & Bird—Emma Radcliffe

London competition team expands with collective actions specialist hire

Hill Dickinson—Chris Williams

Hill Dickinson—Chris Williams

Commercial dispute resolution team in London welcomes partner

NEWS
Judging is ‘more intellectually demanding than any other role in public life’—and far messier than outsiders imagine. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC reflects on decades spent wrestling with unclear legislation, fragile precedent and human fallibility
The long-predicted death of the billable hour may finally be here—and this time, it’s armed with a scythe. In a sweeping critique of time-based billing, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, argues in this week's NLJ that artificial intelligence has made hourly charging ‘intellectually, commercially and ethically indefensible’
From fake authorities to rent reform, the civil courts have had a busy start to 2026. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold surveys a procedural landscape where guidance, discretion and discipline are all under strain
Fact-finding hearings remain a fault line in private family law. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Rylatt and Robyn Laye of Anthony Gold Solicitors analyse recent appeals exposing the dangers of rushed or fragmented findings
As the Winter Olympics open in Milan and Cortina, legal disputes are once again being resolved almost as fast as the athletes compete. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Ian Blackshaw of Valloni Attorneys examines the Court of Arbitration for Sport’s (CAS's) ad hoc divisions, which can decide cases within 24 hours
back-to-top-scroll