header-logo header-logo

New route for Rolls Royce

23 October 2008
Issue: 7342 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail

High Court unites in landmark age discrimination case

The High Court has ruled in favour of Unite in a groundbreaking age discrimination case.

Sir Thomas Morison, sitting alone in the high court, ruled in Rolls Royce v Unite [2008] EWHC 2420 (QB), that it was justifi able to take long service into account when selecting workers for redundancy.

Rolls Royce had sought to argue that this amounted to indirect age discrimination, and breached the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/1031).

Rolls Royce operated a points-based scheme, where points were allocated on various criteria including length of service with the company. It had argued that this was “unlawful age discrimination which could not be justified”. Unite, a trade union, successfully argued that it was lawful.

Michael Stokes, partner at Rowley Ashworth, who advised Unite, says: “This should give employers more confidence about their ability to retain older workers. I am suspicious of some employers’ motives—they have always been able to find justifications for other forms of discrimination, but not for age. When it comes to those provisions, they are almost devoid of ideas. That is not an accident.

“The High Court judge is saying it’s a straightforward matter to justify this [discrimination], that it says so in the legislation, and that it is acceptable to reward the loyalty of older workers.”

Unusually, the case was brought under Pt 8 of the CPR, and determined by a single judge in the High Court, rather than by an employment tribunal. Part 8 is usually used for contractual disputes, where a judge is asked to rule on a point of interpretation.

Stokes, an employment law specialist, says: “I have never seen this route taken before for an employment case.” The case could potentially open up a new route for parties seeking a determination on a grey area of employment law.

Unite joint general secretary Derek Simpson says: “Older workers often find it harder to find alternative employment when they are made redundant”.

Rolls Royce has been granted permission to appeal.

Issue: 7342 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll