Education Law Case Study: Successful academic appeal enabling student to submit dissertation and obtain her Masters

Who did we act for?

We were instructed by Emma.

What was the case about?

Emma had undertaken a two-year Master of Science (MSc) starting in Autumn,  in the hope of graduating a couple of years later.

Emma was diagnosed with depression in her teenage years. In addition, Emma suffered difficult personal circumstance, which caused her to be unwell during her MSc studies.

Emma had been transparent with the University about all the circumstances which were affecting her.  As a result of those circumstances, it had been necessary for Emma to seek extensions to deadlines for her work which had been granted by the University, through their mitigating circumstances procedures.  The University was therefore aware and supportive of Emma.

Part way through her MSc, whilst going through a particularly difficult time, Emma sought another extension to the deadline for submitting her dissertation.  In advance of making this request, Emma spoke to relevant University staff to advise that this was her intention; and the staff members indicated their support.  Emma therefore submitted the extension request as she had done many times before.  Emma followed up her request with email communication with the relevant department seeking confirmation that (i) the request had been properly received and (ii) had been submitted correctly.

It transpired that, unbeknownst to Emma, since her last extension request, the University’s policy had changed and, as a result, the request she had made was not correctly completed.  Consequently, Emma’s extension request was refused.  Emma was unable to submit the dissertation and therefore received zero marks.  Emma was permitted a second opportunity to submit the dissertation, but the mark would be capped.

Emma was told that, as the extension request had been refused for the first attempt, she could submit an academic appeal in relation to the dissertation, to see if they would permit her to submit the dissertation as a first uncapped attempt rather than a second capped attempt.

Emma was not told when that academic appeal should be submitted and therefore assumed that it should be submitted at the same time as her second attempt dissertation.

Emma submitted the dissertation together with her academic appeal.

It transpired that through ignorance, she submitted the academic appeal too late. The University therefore refused Emma’s academic appeal out of hand as it was out of time.

Emma was awarded a low mark for the dissertation and therefore failed her course.

Emma submitted a second stage academic appeal which the University considered was ineligible for review because the first academic appeal had been submitted out of time.  The University fobbed Emma off by advising her to take up a complaint with the OIA.

What did we do?

Emma was in a fragile state when she approached us, so we supported her to discuss her circumstances.  By doing so, we were able to understand the chronology of events.  It became clear that Emma had repeatedly sought out clarification on both the mitigating circumstances procedures and appeals procedures and had, notably, received incorrect advice from relevant University staff.

We instinctively considered that the University’s actions were wrong, but we needed to review all the communications and policies.

We identified several strategies. We ultimately recommended to Emma that an appeal should be made to the University.

We crafted detailed arguments about the University’s wrongful actions, omissions and decisions which spanned over 12 pages.  We pointed out why the University’s stance in relation to the Stage 2 Appeal process was wrong and set out the remedy Emma sought, which was to be able to resubmit her dissertation again.

What was the outcome?

The University was persuaded by us to consider Emma’s case within the appeals process.  The University also accepted that it had been wrong in the way it had approached Emma’s extension request, with the result that she won her academic appeal.

Emma was delighted. The consequence was that Emma was permitted to resubmit her dissertation to obtain her Masters.  As a further consequence of the successful appeal there was no need to pursue either a complaint to the OIA or start legal proceedings against the University, thus saving Emma a considerable amount of money.