A medical student has won a battle at Scotland’s highest civil court against the University of Dundee’s decision not to grant him a degree.
The undergraduate, named only as HK, instructed lawyers to take a judicial review against the university at the Court of Session in Edinburgh.
The legal action stems from a decision made by academics not to allow him to graduate with another degree, a BMSc in applied orthopaedic technology.
The aspiring orthopaedic surgeon – who has been studying for the Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery degree needed to become a medic since 2018 – was supposed sit exams for his BMSc degree in December 2022 but was unable due to issues in his personal life.
A judgement tells of how HK had to go abroad due to the death of his grandfather and had suffered from Covid-19 on two separate occasions.
The student also found it hard to cope with the sudden death of a close family friend early in December 2022.
Academics claim they notified HK by email of new dates in January 2023 for the exams but he claimed he never received this and new dates were not uploaded to his personal online timetable.
IT experts could not retrieve the disputed email as electronic communications at the university were only kept for 90 days.
Examiners then refused to allow HK to graduate with the BMSc degree as he received an “absent” mark for the exams and they claimed he did not have enough passes to allow graduation.
This prompted him to seek the help of his MSP in a bid to obtain the degree.
His attempts to use the university’s formal appeal processes also ended in failure.
HK’s lawyers told the Court of Session the appeal panel failed to properly consider the student’s claims about not receiving the email or his point about his online timetable.
They argued this failure meant the university’s appeals panel acted unlawfully.
In a written judgment published this week, judge Lord Braid upheld HK’s submissions, stating the university “failed to cover itself in glory” in how it dealt with the issue.
He concluded the university acted unlawfully and its appeals panel should once again consider HK’s appeal.
