The SUPREME COURT

On appeal from the Court of Appeal Civil Division (England and Wales)

Issue

The appeal concerns the proper interpretation of “particular disadvantage” in Regulation 3(1)(b)(i) of the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 (“the Regulations”).

Facts

In October 2005, the appellant commenced employment with the Police National Legal Database (PNLD) as a legal adviser. At the time, legal advisers were required to hold a law degree or equivalent, or have "exceptional experience/skills in criminal law, combined with a lesser qualification in law". The appellant qualified under the third requirement. Following a review in 2005, the PNLD established a new career structure with three thresholds. In order to be eligible for the highest pay grade, legal advisers were required to hold a law degree. The appellant was refused entry into the highest pay grade on the basis he did not hold a law degree. He complained to the Employment Tribunal that he had been treated less favourably on the ground of his age, within the meaning of regulation 3 of the Regulations, on the ground that, being 61, he would not be able to obtain a law degree before he was likely to retire, unlike younger employees.


Subject Matter catchwords for indexing

Employment Law - Indirect age discrimination - Directive 2000/78/EC – Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 – Meaning of “particular disadvantage” in Regulation 3(1)(b)