header-logo header-logo

15 February 2024
Issue: 8060 / Categories: Legal News , Equality
printer mail-detail

Universities urged to review procedures after Bristol loses appeal

Bristol University breached the Equality Act 2010 by failing to make adjustments for its student Natasha Abrahart, the High Court has held

Abrahart, a 20-year-old physics student, took her own life in 2018 on the morning of a laboratory conference. She was suffering from depression and social anxiety disorder at the time, which amount to a disability under the Equality Act 2010 and which affected her ability to participate in oral assessments such as the laboratory conference.

The university appealed against a county court ruling that it breached the 2010 Act.

However, Mr Justice Linden dismissed the appeal this week, in University of Bristol v Dr Robert Abrahart [2024] EWHC 299 (KB). Linden J declined to go further and determine whether the university owed Abrahart a duty of care under the law of negligence as ‘the issue is one of potentially wide application and significance. Determining it would increase the risk of prolonging this litigation, which I regard as undesirable.’

Shannett Thompson, partner at Kingsley Napley, said: ‘In this case, the mitigation pleaded by the University of Bristol about the adjustments it made were considered insufficient.

‘Hitherto the relationship between a university and its student has been viewed as a contractual one, with no general duty of care owed. So [this] decision is a gamechanger in that respect. There is also a campaign for universities to have a statutory duty of care to students, but if and until that is enacted, this case opens the door for others to argue about a university's obligations. For example, that could potentially extend to the manner in which it conducts investigations and the safeguarding of participants involved.

‘This case should be a wake-up call for other universities to review their policies and procedures, ensuring they are robust and effective, especially where students have known mental health issues.’

Issue: 8060 / Categories: Legal News , Equality
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll