In R&R Plant (Peterborough) Ltd v Bailey  IRLR 503 CA, the Court of Appeal held that the employer's notice of its intention to retire the employee did not comply with the (now repealed) statutory retirement procedures with regard to informing the employee of the right to request to continue working beyond retirement age.
The Court of Appeal has held that, when an employer was informing an employee of the right to request not to retire under the repealed statutory default retirement procedures, it was required to cite para.5 of sch.6 to the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006. However, the Court of Appeal said that there was no requirement on the employer to inform the employee of the requirements of a valid request.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employer that follows the procedural requirements of the repealed statutory retirement procedure, but refuses to countenance the possibility that a request not to retire might be granted, can be in breach of the statutory retirement procedure.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that a retirement notice issued under the now-defunct statutory retirement procedure that stated that the employee would cease work "after" his 65th birthday was valid.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that, under the statutory default retirement procedures (now repealed), the employer must inform the employee of the essential conditions for exercising the right to request to work beyond the intended retirement date.
The Government consults on proposals to remove the default retirement age by 1 October 2011.
IRS research on the default retirement age finds that three-quarters of employers surveyed have retained a contractual retirement age and the same number do not wish to see it abolished or raised above 65.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to compulsory retirement under the statutory retirement procedures.