Chief Constable of West Midlands Police and others v Harrod and others UKEAT/0189/14

No indirect discrimination where pension based on age

The EAT in West Midlands Police v Harrod held that Rule A19 of the Police Pensions Regulations 1987 (which allowed for the retirement of police officers who met certain criteria) disadvantaged officers over the age of 48; however in order to meet the Government’s requirement to make a 20% cut in budget, the use of this provision to achieve cuts was found to be justified. The claims for indirect age discrimination therefore failed: what was done was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

The full content of this page is available to subscribers only. Please purchase a subscription if you feel this content will be of use to you.

Login or subscribe (includes subscription information) to access the full content of this page.