"Disparate Impact" Theory Available In Age Discrimination Cases
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.07.05
Resolving a split in the circuit courts, a divided Supreme Court in Smith v. City of Jackson, (Mar. 30, 2005) held that the "disparate impact" theory of liability, which does not require a showing of discriminatory intent, applies to claims asserted under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). However, the Court noted that "the scope of disparate-impact liability under ADEA is narrower" than under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, due to statutory language in ADEA that permits employers to take "otherwise prohibited" employment action where the "differentiation is based on reasonable factors other than age," such as seniority or rank.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.13.26
Supreme Court Confirms Contractual Loss of Bargain Without Repudiatory Breach
English law has long treated the choice between terminating for repudiatory breach and exercising a contractual termination right as consequential. Under the Financings[1] causation principle, a party exercising a contractual right for a non-repudiatory breach could recover losses accrued to the date of termination — but nothing more. Loss of bargain was out of reach unless the breach went to the root of the contract. A practical workaround, confirmed in Lombard,[2] was to designate the relevant obligation as a condition, elevating any breach to repudiatory status, but that device carries significant strategic risk if the termination is later found to have been wrongful.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.12.26
Developments in Canadian Investment Treaty Practice: New FIPA Between Canada and UAE in Force
Client Alert | 6 min read | 08.11.26
Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.10.26
