INDEPENDENT NEWS

Court rejects Cathay unit's retirement age of 55 for pilots

Published: Wed 13 Sep 2017 02:52 PM
Supreme Court rejects Cathay unit's retirement age of 55 for pilots
By Paul McBeth
Sept. 13 (BusinessDesk) - The Supreme Court has backed two Auckland-based Cathay Pacific pilots who claimed local law meant they couldn't be forced to retire at 55.
Chief Justice Sian Elias, and justices William Young, Susan Glazebrook, Mark O'Regan and Ellen France today sided with pilots David Brown and Glen Sycamore, ruling that Cathay unit New Zealand Basing Ltd (NZBL) couldn't discriminate against the pair on the grounds of age. That overturns a decision in the Court of Appeal which accepted the company's argument that the agreement was governed by Hong Kong law which New Zealand legislation didn't override.
While the bench came to the same conclusion, the Chief Justice and Justices France and O'Regan took the view that pilots weren't captured by any exceptions in the Human Rights Act and would fall within the Employment Relations Act. It would be "very odd" for the law to "allow discrimination in the employment context in relation to persons in the appellants' position, solely on the basis of the parties' choice of law," they said.
Justices Young and Glazebrook also ruled in favour of the pilots, finding the right not to be discriminated against because of age wasn't limited to employment agreements governed by New Zealand law, and comparing it to prohibitions against other forms of discrimination such as sexism or racism.
"It might be thought to be contrary to the policy of the HRA (Human Rights Act) to exclude its operation in relation to acts of discrimination which occur in New Zealand merely because the proper law of the employment agreement is not that of New Zealand," the judges said.
However, Justices Young and Glazebrook said their focus was on age discrimination and that they didn't make a determination on "the territorial scope of the other personal grievance rights, and in particular, the right not to be unjustifiably dismissed (in cases not involving unlawful discrimination)."
The judges also set aside the Court of Appeal's costs order against the pilots, and ordered the company to pay the pilots' appeal court costs and the $25,000 of costs and reasonable disbursements from the Supreme Court appeal.
(BusinessDesk)
ends
BusinessDesk
Independent, Trustworthy New Zealand Business News
The Wellington-based BusinessDesk team led by former Bloomberg Asian top editor Jonathan Underhill and Qantas Award-winning journalist and commentator Pattrick Smellie provides a daily news feed for a serious business audience.
Contact BusinessDesk
Email:

Next in Business, Science, and Tech

Refinery prepares to repair damaged pipeline
By: Refining NZ
Cassini's grand Saturn finale - Expert Reaction
By: Science Media Centre
Judgment: AFFCO NZ Limited v NZ Meat Workers Union
By: NZ Supreme Court
NZ govt agrees on negotiating mandate for upgraded FTA
By: BusinessDesk
Air NZ restricts ticket sales as Auck fuel shortage bite
By: BusinessDesk
MARKET CLOSE: NZ shares up, milk stocks Synlait, A2 gain
By: BusinessDesk
MBIE: Wiri terminal wouldn't have avoided pipeline woes
By: BusinessDesk
UPDATE: NZ Refining, Air NZ shares fall
By: BusinessDesk
NZ Refining says pipeline leak to hit revenue by up to $15m
By: BusinessDesk
Update on Marsden Point pipeline disruption
By: New Zealand Government
Update on Marsden Point pipeline disruption
By: New Zealand Government
Update on Marsden Point pipeline disruption
By: New Zealand Government
Temporary disruption to Marsden Point pipeline
By: New Zealand Government
Freight being shifted off planes as fuel crisis worsens
By: New Zealand Labour Party
View as: DESKTOP | MOBILEWe're in BETA! Send Feedback © Scoop Media