There was no finding of age discrimination after bar and waiting staff were replaced with new ones that better fit a "modern and trendy" image.
This case is a reminder that, when justifying age discrimination, evidence that there are no less discriminatory alternatives is important to show proportionality.
The ECJ has held that EU law setting an age limit of 65 years old for pilots was not age discriminatory and was justified.
A Tribunal dismissed a claim of age discrimination was dismissed after holding that, because of uncertainty about the Claimant's real age, the employer could not have known their age when terminating her.
An Employment Tribunal has rejected a former employee’s claim against BT, where he argued that he was dismissed as a result of performance improvement plans that were age discriminatory.
An estate agent subjected an employee to direct age discrimination when they told her she was “better suited to a traditional estate agency”.
A 63 year old Director of a law firm whose retirement was referred to as “the elephant in the room” had not been subjected to direct age discrimination.
Italian law requires "on call contracts" (zero hours contracts) to be subject to objective conditions, unless the worker is either under 25 years of age or over 45 years of age. This case considered whether this law is age discriminatory.
An employment tribunal has ruled in favour of 200 judges whose pension entitlements were cut and found unjustified age discrimination.
The ECJ has ruled that a police force was justified in setting an age limit of 35 years old for new recruits.
Was it age discrimination for a Finnish law to tax pension income at a higher rate than earned income?
The phrase "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" was not age discrimination (nor was it religion or belief discrimination).
A failure to investigate a Breakfast Supervisor's complaints of age discrimination was, in itself, age discrimination.
The EAT says that it was not age discrimination to demote a poor performing partner in a law firm.
The ECJ says that a national court must disapply principles of national law that conflict with the general principle of EU law prohibiting age discrimination, and cannot prioritise principles of legal certainty or legitimate expectations instead.
The EAT has dismissed an appeal against an ET's decision to strike out a direct age discrimination claim.
University criteria that restricted appointment to a post was justified indirect age discrimination.
Various references to an individual's age during a process to dismiss him were age discrimination.
Did additional "pension strain cost" influence a decision not to make someone redundant?