JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
PAPER CHASE NEWSBURSTDigest RSS feedFull RSS feed
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.


Thursday, March 05, 2009

Europe court rules UK mandatory retirement law not discriminatory
Steve Czajkowski at 9:16 AM ET

[JURIST] The European Court of Justice (ECJ) [official website] ruled [materials; press release, PDF] Thursday that UK regulations permitting mandatory retirement policies for workers who reach the age of 65 do not violate an EU anti-discrimination law. The case was originally brought by the group Age Concern England [advocacy website], which argued that the UK regulations violate a European Commission [official website] directive [EC 2000/78, PDF] that prohibits discrimination based on age in regards to employment and occupation. In its decision, the ECJ emphasized that the UK regulations are only legal if they meet legitimate social policy objectives:

Article 6(1) of Directive 2000/78 must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude a national measure which, like Regulation 3 of the Regulations at issue in the main proceedings, does not contain a precise list of the aims justifying derogation from the principle prohibiting discrimination on grounds of age. However, Article 6(1) offers the option to derogate from that principle only in respect of measures justified by legitimate social policy objectives, such as those related to employment policy, the labour market or vocational training.
The ruling follows a September opinion [JURIST report] by ECJ Advocate General Jan Marzak that concluded age-based classifications are justifiable in some circumstances. The ECJ ruling ultimately leaves the decision of whether the laws are legitimate and appropriate to the UK national courts. The decision placed a high standard of proof on the UK government for establishing the law's legitimacy, a position welcomed [press release] by Age Concern.

Last year, the ECJ rejected an advocate general's opinion [JURIST report; OUT-LAW report] in a Spanish case [ECJ materials] challenging an employer's mandatory retirement policy. The ECJ found that such policies do not violate the EU prohibition against age discrimination if intended to further the legitimate public interest of increasing employment and if the retirees are provided with full pensions.





Link |  | print | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | Facebook page

For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...


LATEST LEGAL NEWS

 Supreme Court hears arguments on false political statements, TV copyright
2:32 PM ET, April 22

 Oklahoma high court stays executions over lethal injection drug challenge
12:09 PM ET, April 22

 Georgia same-sex marriage ban challenged
12:05 PM ET, April 22

 click for more...

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!

LATEST FORUM

Unprecedented Notice of Warrantless Wiretapping in a Closed Case
DOMESTIC
Ramzi Kassem
CUNY School of Law

ABOUT

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.

CONTACT

Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org