Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes
This report relates to 1 case(s)
-
expand
Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes [2009] IRLR 267 EAT (2 other reports)
The case went on to the Supreme Court, which held that the employment tribunal was entitled to find that the firm's aims were capable of being legitimate (Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes (a partnership) [2012] IRLR 590 SC). However, the case was sent back to the employment tribunal to consider the proportionality of a retirement specifically at 65 (Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes ET/1100275/2007).
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that maintaining the friendly culture of a law firm by avoiding confrontation with underperforming partners close to retirement was not a legitimate aim that could justify the compulsory retirement of partners at 65.
Mr Seldon was a partner at a law firm that had a policy of retiring partners at 65.
