Eu Law Synopsised Judgment of Marshall
EU Law Assignment by Mark Ryder (1571728)
The case of Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) (Marshall (No.1)) [1986] 1 C.M.L.R. 688 arose in the United Kingdom. It concerned a Miss Marshall who had been employed as a Senior Dietician with the Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) from the 23rd of May 1974 until her dismissal on the 31st of March 1980, that is to say four weeks after she reached the age of 62. Since 1975 the Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) had a written policy of that in general, its female employees should retire at 60 while its male employees should retire at 65. The policy stated that “the normal retirement age will be the age at which social security pensions become payable”. The policy was an implied term of Miss Marshall’s employment contract. Miss Marshall’s employers waived this general policy in the case of Miss Marshall. If her employers had not done this, then she would have been dismissed on the 4th of February 1978 (upon reaching the age of 60) but was in fact employed until the 31st of March 1980 (four weeks after she reached the age of 62), therefore her employer waived they’re general retirement policy in respect of Miss Marshall for two years. The applicable pension legislation in the United Kingdom at the time of the dismissal stated that men were eligible to receive a state pension at the age of 65 and that women were to receive state pensions from the age of 60 (Section 27 (1) of the Social Security Act 1975). However this legislation does not impose any obligation to retire at the age at which the state pension becomes payable and when a person continues in employment after the date when their state pension becomes payable, the payment of the pension is deferred. According to the order of reference, the sole reason for the dismissal of Miss Marshall was the fact that she was a woman who had
The case of Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) (Marshall (No.1)) [1986] 1 C.M.L.R. 688 arose in the United Kingdom. It concerned a Miss Marshall who had been employed as a Senior Dietician with the Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) from the 23rd of May 1974 until her dismissal on the 31st of March 1980, that is to say four weeks after she reached the age of 62. Since 1975 the Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) had a written policy of that in general, its female employees should retire at 60 while its male employees should retire at 65. The policy stated that “the normal retirement age will be the age at which social security pensions become payable”. The policy was an implied term of Miss Marshall’s employment contract. Miss Marshall’s employers waived this general policy in the case of Miss Marshall. If her employers had not done this, then she would have been dismissed on the 4th of February 1978 (upon reaching the age of 60) but was in fact employed until the 31st of March 1980 (four weeks after she reached the age of 62), therefore her employer waived they’re general retirement policy in respect of Miss Marshall for two years. The applicable pension legislation in the United Kingdom at the time of the dismissal stated that men were eligible to receive a state pension at the age of 65 and that women were to receive state pensions from the age of 60 (Section 27 (1) of the Social Security Act 1975). However this legislation does not impose any obligation to retire at the age at which the state pension becomes payable and when a person continues in employment after the date when their state pension becomes payable, the payment of the pension is deferred. According to the order of reference, the sole reason for the dismissal of Miss Marshall was the fact that she was a woman who had
Bibliography: Cases 1. Judgement of Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) (Marshall (No.1)) [1986] 1 C.M.L.R. 688 -------------------------------------------- [ 1 ]. Judgement of Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) (Marshall (No.1)) [1986] 1 C.M.L.R. 688 page 3, line 11. [ 2 ]. Judgement of Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) (Marshall (No.1)) [1986] 1 C.M.L.R. 688 page 11, line 37. [ 3 ]. Judgement of Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) (Marshall (No.1)) [1986] 1 C.M.L.R. 688 page 11, line 36. [ 4 ]. Judgement of Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) (Marshall (No.1)) [1986] 1 C.M.L.R. 688 page 11, line 51. [ 5 ]. Judgement of Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) (Marshall (No.1)) [1986] 1 C.M.L.R. 688 page 15, line 37 [ 6 ]. Judgement of Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) (Marshall (No.1)) [1986] 1 C.M.L.R. 688 page 17, line 2. [ 7 ]. Judgement of Marshall v Southampton and South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching) (Marshall (No.1)) [1986] 1 C.M.L.R. 688 page 17, line 19.