Case 1300991/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs M Saafan v BT Group plc — 2020

Case reference: 1300991/2019
Decision date: 9 December 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Broughton Members
Venue: Birmingham
Panel members: Mr Liburd, Mr Morrison

Indexed: 20 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs M Saafan

Respondent

BT Group plc

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal upheld the claimant's indirect disability discrimination claim. It also upheld claims of discrimination arising from disability in relation to the internal recruitment process, talent entry, and one of the talent acquisition roles.

Because those claims succeeded, the tribunal said there was no need to consider the claimant's reasonable adjustment claims in relation to those roles. The judgment records that the claimant's other claims failed and were dismissed.

The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

This case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Disability discrimination	The claim of indirect disability discrimination succeeded.	Upheld	Disability	—
Disability discrimination	Claims of discrimination arising from disability succeeded in relation to the internal recruitment, talent entry, and one of the talent acquisition roles.	Upheld	Disability	—
Disability discrimination	The judgment states that the claimant's other claims failed and were dismissed, but the extracted text does not specify each dismissed allegation individually. The tribunal also stated there was no need to consider reasonable adjustment claims in relation to the roles where other disability claims succeeded.	Dismissed	Disability	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.

Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

How we got this data

Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.

Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.