This case involved a claim by the plaintiff that the defendant was not entitled to terminate his employment based on age. The plaintiff had worked for the defendant since 1998 and was informed a month before his 65th birthday that his employment would terminate with effect from his 65th birthday. This termination was due to the fact Mr Quigley would be reaching the purported maximum retirement age of 65.

Accordingly, the plaintiff sought an injunction restraining same, pending the determination of proceedings. The plaintiff challenged the termination on the basis that his contract of employment was not subject to a maximum retirement age and there was no provision preventing him continuing in employment upon reaching the age of 65.