Simon Pipe v Coventry Higher Education
[2024] EWCA Civ 191
University Of Bristol v Dr Robert Abrahart (Administrator of the estate of Natasha Abrahart, deceased)
14 February 2024
[2024] EWHC 299 (KB)
High Court
A university student with anxiety killed herself. Her family sued the university for not helping her with her exams, which caused her stress. The court agreed the university should have made her exams easier and ordered the university to pay damages. The court didn’t decide on another claim about whether the university was careless.
Key Facts
- •Natasha Abrahart, a Bristol University physics student, died by suicide on April 30, 2018, while suffering from depression and social anxiety disorder.
- •Her father, Dr. Robert Abrahart, sued Bristol University for disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 and negligence.
- •The County Court found the University breached duties under sections 15, 19, and 20 of the Equality Act 2010, awarding £50,000 in damages.
- •The negligence claim was dismissed.
- •Bristol University appealed the disability discrimination findings, and Dr. Abrahart cross-appealed the dismissal of the negligence claim.
Legal Principles
Disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, including sections 15 (discrimination arising from disability), 19 (indirect discrimination), and 20 (duty to make reasonable adjustments).
Equality Act 2010
The duty to make reasonable adjustments is anticipatory; educational institutions should proactively consider adjustments for disabled students, even without a formal request.
Schedule 13 to the Equality Act 2010, Technical Guidance [7.20]
A competence standard is not a provision, criterion, or practice (PCP) for the purposes of the duty to make reasonable adjustments. However, methods of assessing competence standards are subject to the duty to make reasonable adjustments.
Schedule 13 to the Equality Act 2010 [4(2), (3)]
For discrimination arising from disability (section 15), the employer must have actual or constructive knowledge of the facts constituting the employee's disability.
Gallop v Newport City Council [2013] EWCA Civ 1583
Justification under section 15(1)(b) requires the treatment to be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, considering whether less detrimental treatment could have achieved the objective.
Bank Mellat v HM Treasury (No 2) [2013] UKSC 38
In appeals, the High Court reviews the lower court's decision, only interfering with findings of fact if unsupported by the evidence or unreasonable.
CPR r52.21
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed; County Court's findings of disability discrimination upheld.
The University failed to make reasonable adjustments to avoid the substantial disadvantage Ms Abrahart faced due to her disability, even though it had sufficient knowledge of her condition. The oral assessments were not deemed competence standards; therefore, alternative assessment methods were reasonable.
Cross-appeal on negligence not determined.
The court deemed it unnecessary to rule on the negligence claim given the upheld disability discrimination findings. Several factors contributed to this decision, including the potential complexity and broad implications of the negligence issue, and the possibility of requiring a re-trial.
Similar Cases
Edge Hill University v E Glasby
[2023] EAT 162
Thomas Aubrey James Needham v The Master and Fellows of the College of the Great Hall of the University of Oxford
[2023] EWHC 1591 (KB)
THE KING (on the application of Flinn Kays) v SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK AND PENSIONS
[2022] EWCA Civ 1593
The Governing Body of School T v AA & Anor
[2023] UKUT 311 (AAC)