Homer v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police
[2012] UKSC 15
Independent editorial summary — not the official judgment. Read the full judgment via the source link.
Ratio Decidendi
A requirement for a law degree for promotion to the highest grade could constitute indirect age discrimination where an older employee close to retirement could not realistically obtain the qualification. The employer must objectively justify the PCP.
Facts
Mr Homer, a police intelligence analyst aged 62, was denied promotion because he lacked a law degree. He could not obtain one before retirement. He argued the degree requirement indirectly discriminated on grounds of age.
Judgment Summary
The Supreme Court held the degree requirement was a PCP that put older workers at a particular disadvantage. The case was remitted to the Employment Tribunal to determine whether the requirement was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
Key Quotes
"The law of indirect discrimination is an attempt to level the playing field by subjecting to scrutiny requirements which look neutral on their face but in reality work to the comparative disadvantage of people with a particular protected characteristic. A requirement which works to the comparative disadvantage of a person approaching compulsory retirement age is indirectly discriminatory on grounds of age."
— Lady Hale at [17](verbatim, verified against the judgment)
Subsequent Treatment
Leading authority on indirect age discrimination and objective justification.
What To Do Next
Step-by-Step Guides
Know Your Rights
Get Professional Help