The Age Concern and Help the Aged judicial review starts today. The case that has wended its way up to the European Court of Justice is now back here in the UK for evidence and further examination.

People in their 50s and 60s, making their plans - not to retire but to work on - will be keenly interested in the outcome of the High Court hearing in London.  Whatever arguments the Government had for introducing a national default retirement age must be rigorously examined.

The Government will have to convince the Court that behind the decision there is a legitimate social policy aim and that the national default retirement age actually does achieve this objective, whatever it may be.

So far we have not heard of such an aim – the only arguments advanced have been of an entirely business case nature, and on closer scrutiny these fail to stand up (as the recent survey by TAEN and the EFA demonstrates.)

The Government’s policy document Building Society for All Ages issued this week, sets out the official social policy objectives of the UK as a whole. Its entire ethos is to maintain the economic and social activity of people in later life, rather than to consign them to the dustbins of the ‘no longer needed’ as the default retirement age implies.

The promise by the Government to bring forward the review of the default retirement age to 2010 is a clear admission that its plans were wrongly conceived. Obviously this is good news, but it is time to move on. We don’t need a review; we don’t need a court hearing; we need to remove this ridiculous ban on people going out and earning a living when they need the money and their country needs them more than ever.

The CBI should recognise that it has lost the argument and call off its lobby dogs, snapping at the heels of ministers in the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills with spurious arguments suggesting that all employers need a mandatory retirement age in order to make their manpower plans and succession plans work. This really is not true and TAEN has produced evidence to prove it.

In any event, if the national default retirement age were to be repealed, it would still be open to any company with a strong case, in its particular circumstances, to retain a mandatory retirement age and justify it in front of the courts or tribunals if individuals objected. Employers really shouldn’t need this pathetic fig leaf to cover up their embarrassingly weak arguments.

Hence, the best thing that could happen this morning would be for the Government to throw in the towel. That way, we could move on immediately to get rid of this unneeded clause in the law, allowing older workers to plan their futures at a time when they really need certainty and economic security.

The wheels of justice grind slowly; the hearing may last up to ten days and a decision is expected in the Autumn.