Fasano (appellant) v Reckitt Benckiser Group Plc & anr (respondents)
Tuesday 1 April 2025
By Appellant’s Notice filed on 20 February 2024, the Claimant appeals against the order made by the Employment Appeals Tribunal sealed on 31 January 2024 dismissing C’s appeal from the Employment Tribunal’s decision dismissing the claim.
C’s claim was for indirect age discrimination concerning the operation of a Long-Term incentive Plan operated by Rs, which had the effect the he was denied certain benefits as he was not employed by R2 when the key rule change took effect.
The ET dismissed the claim holding that the PCP put C under a disadvantage but it was a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of retaining staff and was therefore justified.
The EAT overturned the ET’s decision on justification and concluded that the PCP deployed could not be objectively justified as it did not further the stated aim. The EAT held that C’s claim failed but on a different basis from that relied on by the ET in that there was no remedy since no entity within the corporate structure was fixed with responsibility.
View hearing: