Saad v Queen's University Belfast [2009] NIIT 708_08IT (07 May 2009)

Saad v Queen's University Belfast [2009] NIIT 708_08IT (07 May 2009)

The tribunal found that the shortlisting panel applied the criterion of 'experience of contributing to Work-based learning programmes,' defined as 'experience of converting professional practice to academic credentials,' equally to all candidates, including the claimant. The claimant did not satisfy this criterion...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] NIIT 708_08IT
Parties
Claimant: Mohamed Saad; Respondent: Queen's University Belfast
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
07 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Employment Discrimination / Final Judgment
Outcome
claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Race Discrimination, Shortlisting Criteria, Burden of Proof, Recruitment Process
Employment Law Equality Law Race Discrimination Shortlisting Criteria Burden of Proof Recruitment Process

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohamed Saad

Claimant

Queen's University Belfast

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Discrimination / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was unlawfully discriminated against on racial grounds contrary to the Race Relations (Northern Ireland) Order 1997 in the shortlisting process for a university post.

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found that the shortlisting panel applied the criterion of 'experience of contributing to Work-based learning programmes,' defined as 'experience of converting professional practice to academic credentials,' equally to all candidates, including the claimant. The claimant did not satisfy this criterion as defined. The mere fact that all shortlisted candidates were of a different race and the claimant was not shortlisted was insufficient to infer unlawful discrimination. There was no evidence that the decision was based on race rather than the claimant's failure to meet the criterion. Therefore, the claim of unlawful racial discrimination failed.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed