The claim, the first big test case brought against the Government since new age discrimination laws were introduced in October, was referred to the ECJ after a High Court hearing in December last year.
Heydey, an arm of Age Concern, is bringing the claim, arguing that the UK Government was in breach of the European Union’s Equal Treatment Directive by imposing a mandatory retirement age of 65, as well as justifying direct age discrimination.
Irwin Mitchell head of public law Andrew Lockley assisted by Kate Fletcher, is advising Heydey on the case, which is due to take place at the end of the year. The Government is being represented by the Treasury Solicitors.
The case will be closely watched by
However, Heydey’s case could be jeopardised by a Spanish case currently being heard at the ECJ. In that case, a preliminary ruling stated last week (15 February) that the Equal Treatment Directive does not apply to setting a compulsory retirement age.
If ECJ judges rule in favour of the initial opinion, it could strike out Heydey’s ability to raise the same point. However, Heydey will still be able to raise the issue of direct age discrimination, something not mentioned in the Spanish case.
Lockley said the Spanish case, which is between two private parties, is very different to Heydey’s claim, commenting: “The Age Concern case in the ECJ could go on even if the compulsory age retirement point is regarded as unwinnable, but we do not think it is.”
