Education Update - Students

Published: 7th October 2009

In the case of R (on the application of CLARKE) v CARDIFF UNIVERSITY (2009) the claimant ex-student applied to quash a decision of the "extenuating circumstances committee" of the defendant university dismissing her application for extenuating circumstances to be taken into account in relation to an assessment that she was adjudged to have failed in her course of study. The basis of her complaint was that two lecturers had placed her under undue stress at the time of her assessment.

Both lecturers provided evidence to the committee as to what had occurred prior to the negotiation assessment. An appeal against that decision was dismissed by the university's re-convened examination board. Both lecturers were also present at that appeal hearing, though they did not participate in the ultimate decision.

The court held that it was not fair for those lecturers to participate fully in the committee's decision-making process given that they were also providing information to the decision-makers which, inevitably, had the effect of casting doubt upon the claimant's credibility. There could be no doubt that those lecturers' views were capable of being very influential to the committee's eventual decision and, in those circumstances, they should have been precluded from participating in the decision-making process. Neither at the committee hearing nor at the board hearing did the members receive any views from the claimant about the facts as told to them by the lecturers. On that basis, the decisions reached on those occasions were capable of being viewed as unfair. Accordingly, both decisions would be quashed.