A judge has called time on the Government’s statutory retirement age of 65, ruling that in the current economic climate it was unlikely to be lawful.

Retirement age to change?

In a test challenge, Mr Justice Blake ruled that he did not see how 65 could stay as the default retirement age when the Government reviewed it next year — although it would still be lawful for employers to sack workers when they reached that age until the law was changed.

In a huge boost to campaigners who want the age scrapped, he said: “I cannot presently see how 65 could remain as a DRA after the review.”

His comments came in a ruling on a challenge to the retirement age brought by the charities Age Concern and Help the Aged, together with the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

The judge said that he recognised the “very substantial weight” of the arguments put forward by the charities. But he rejected their challenge on the basis that the Government was able to justify the retirement age when it was first introduced. However, conditions such as the state of the job market had now changed, he said. Charities immediately called on the Government to change the law in the light of the judge’s comments, saying that the Government had avoided defeat only because ministers had already caved in to pressure for a review next year.

John Wadham, legal group director of the equality commission, said: “The judge has sent out a strong signal that it is only a matter of time before the default retirement age of 65 is removed and we will consider what action we could take next.”

Age Concern and Help the Aged called on MPs to demonstrate their support for older workers by acting urgently to overturn the “unfair” and “outdated” legislation.

Andrew Harrop, head of public policy at Age Concern and Help the Aged, said: “Today’s ruling does not spell the end of our campaign to win justice for older workers. Ministers should amend the Equality Bill, which is currently making its way through Parliament.”

The Government argued that the EU directive on equal treatment in employment permitted member states to allow differences in treatment on age grounds if objectively and reasonably justified by a legitimate social policy aim.

The ruling clears the way for hundreds of tribunal claims to proceed.But David Green, head of the employment and pensions group Charles Russell, said that people with claims pending were likely to have them dismissed unless the ruling was overturned in the Court of Appeal.

He said: “This decision means that it is still lawful for employers to forcibly retire people at 65 provided they follow the correct statutory procedure.”

Times Online
29th September 2009