I think there is a slight difference between defending clear violations of the contract - ie SO Bypass, and defending individuals who are reaching retirement age on their contracts - where it is very hard and costly to prove any sort of violation.
I have sympathy with guys reaching 55 and wanting to continue working
BUT
What should much rather be a priority is negotiating a deal on age 65 that works for everybody. If this appeal is won in England it WILL be detrimental to the efforts of the AOA to negotiate a new deal on age 65 with the company. It may force the company to extend all from then on because a precedent would have been set - and this will seriouly compromise junior officers attempts to negotiate some fair compensation. This is a lose lose situation.