• This month

  • …at a glance

• Legal updates

  • Forcing retirement is discriminatory
  • Tolerating sexual harassment does not imply acceptance
  • Non-payment of discretionary bonus can give rise to claim

• Case archive

  • July 09
  • June 09
  • May 09
  • April 09
  • March 09
  • January 09
  • November 08
  • July 08
  • June 08
  • April 08
  • March 08
  • February 08

Enquiries

T: +44 (0) 1451 812 225

info@west-writing.com

Forcing retirement is discriminatory

Martin and ors v Professional Game Match Officials

ET/2802438/09

Key facts

Martin was an Assistant Referee compulsorily retired by the employer at age 48, who argued that this was necessary for the development of the careers of other Referees and Assistants.

The ruling

The Employment Tribunal ruled that the dismissal was discriminatory on the grounds of age. Although a defence that the development of the careers of others was a legitimate aim for the employer, compulsory retirement at a fixed age was not deemed to be a proportionate response and the termination was therefore direct age discrimination.