Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 07 JULY 2014

Selecting A Retirement Age: Is 65 Just A Number?

The EAT has issued a decision in the well-known and long-running retirement case of Seldon v Clarkson Wright and Jakes, which dealt with the question:

United KingdomEmployment and HR

Summary

The EAT has issued a decision in the well-known and long-running retirement case of Seldon v Clarkson Wright and Jakes, which dealt with the question:

Was the retirement age of 65 PROPORTIONATE to achieve the firm's stated aims of retention of staff and workforce planning?

Following the removal of the default retirement age, employers need to justify any retirement policy in place by showing that it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.  In Seldon, the EAT has found that it was proportionate for the firm to select a retirement age of 65, even though using a higher age could have a less discriminatory effect.  The reasoning in this case may be useful to employers setting a retirement age, or considering other policies which may be potentially age-discriminatory (e.g. benefits policies).  

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from