A tribunal has ruled that Walker Morris LLP unlawfully discriminated against senior partner Martin Scott by forcing him to leave the firm due to his age.
The panel found the firm’s mandatory retirement policy to be in breach of the Equality Act 2010 and concluded that Mr Scott had been unfairly denied an extension to remain as a partner.
Mr Scott, represented by Milners Solicitors and Counsel Darryl Hutcheon and Hugh Tomlinson KC of Matrix Chambers, had been a long-serving partner and head of the firm’s construction and engineering department. His experience in high-profile construction and engineering disputes, commercial litigation and fraud cases had earned him recognition in the Legal 500 of top global lawyers.
In 2020, he was required to apply for an exceptional extension to remain at the firm beyond 60, which was granted due to his “exceptional contribution.” However, in 2023, at the age of 63, he was denied a further extension and was required to leave. The tribunal unanimously found this decision was based on discriminatory assumptions about older partners, rather than objective evidence.
‘No Justification’ for Discriminatory Age Policies
The tribunal ruled that while direct age discrimination can sometimes be justified, Walker Morris failed to provide sufficient evidence that its mandatory retirement policy was reasonably necessary. It found that the firm had alternatives that would have been less discriminatory.
The ruling criticised the firm’s approach, stating that its decisions were based on “discriminatory assumptions about and attitudes towards older partners” rather than any documented or objective evidence. The tribunal noted that age discrimination legislation exists to challenge such assumptions.
Giles Ward, senior partner at Milners, welcomed the ruling, describing it as a significant decision for professional services firms with mandatory retirement policies.
Supreme Court Reference
“This far-reaching judgment will be of obvious interest to law firms and other professional service firms across the UK with mandatory retirement policies,” Ward said.
The tribunal also referenced the Supreme Court’s decision in Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes, which set a precedent for age discrimination cases in professional services. The panel found that senior management at Walker Morris had suggested partner performance declines with age – but had not provided documentary or objective evidence to support this claim.
The ruling stated, “Much of the respondent’s evidence on justification did not get beyond broad assertions, some of which were based upon discriminatory assumptions, for example in relation to the perceived reduction in energy levels in older partners.”
A separate hearing to determine compensation for Mr Scott is scheduled to take place in Leeds in May.
