An age discrimination case brought by a university lecturer is set to be reheard this year.
A judge recently ruled that an employment tribunal was wrong to dismiss the claim made by Stephen Games.
Mr Games, who worked part-time at the University of Kent’s School of Architecture, had launched legal action after he failed to make a shortlist for one of several full-time posts that had come up in the department.
The 62-year-old said that the university had made it “an absolute requirement” for candidates to have a PhD.
Taking his case to tribunal, the academic argued that this amounted to indirect ageism, since only a handful of older graduates in the field had obtained the qualification.
To support his case, Mr Games obtained figures from 33 universities through the Freedom of Information Act. The data showed that only five doctorates were awarded in architecture in 1981, compared to 90 in 2011.
In July last year, the claim was thrown out after a tribunal accepted that Mr Games had had adequate time to obtain a PhD through prior publication.
Now however, employment judge David Richardson has ruled that the tribunal did not state why it had favoured the university’s argument over the lecturer’s.
“The employment tribunal did not ask or answer the question whether the requirement for a PhD was necessary and did not offer findings on evidence submitted by Mr Games that cast considerable doubt on the need for such a practice,” said Judge Richardson.
A fresh tribunal into the alleged age discrimination will take place later this year.