Air Products Plc v Cockram

Air Products Plc v Cockram

The employment tribunal was entitled to find that limiting the retirement exception to age 55 was a legitimate social policy objective of intergenerational fairness and incentivising retention, and that the provision was a proportionate means of achieving those aims. The EAT erred in interfering with the tribunal's factual findings and reasoning.

Parties
Appellant: Air Products PLC; Respondent: Michael Cockram
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal to Court of Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed; complaint of age discrimination dismissed; tribunal decision restored
Legal Topics
Age Discrimination, Objective Justification, Long Term Incentive Plans, Proportionality, Intergenerational Fairness
Employment Law Discrimination Law Age Discrimination Objective Justification Long Term Incentive Plans Proportionality Intergenerational Fairness

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Air Products PLC

Appellant

Michael Cockram

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether limiting the retirement exception in the LTIP to employees aged 55 or over constitutes unlawful direct age discrimination under the Equality Act 2010
  2. 2 Whether the discriminatory effect is objectively justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim

Ratio Decidendi

The employment tribunal was entitled to find that limiting the retirement exception to age 55 was a legitimate social policy objective of intergenerational fairness and incentivising retention, and that the provision was a proportionate means of achieving those aims. The EAT erred in interfering with the tribunal's factual findings and reasoning.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; complaint of age discrimination dismissed; tribunal decision restored

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The decision of the employment tribunal dismissing the complaint of age discrimination is restored.