Case Summaries
Back to Case SummariesHarassment and sexual misconduct - CS022506
Case summary February 2025 | Settled
This case summary describes a student’s complaint about how their provider responded to their academic appeal and it contains a brief description of sexual misconduct. The student explained within their appeal that their academic performance had been affected by sexual misconduct committed by a work colleague.
A student didn’t pass her final attempt at the dissertation component of their course and the provider withdrew her. The student appealed against this decision, explaining she’d been sexually assaulted and subject to coercive and controlling behaviour by a colleague at work during the time she was working on her dissertation. She submitted a letter from her GP in support of the appeal.
The provider didn’t uphold the student’s appeal because it said that under its regulations the student had declared herself “fit to sit” by submitting the dissertation. It said the student was aware of the provider’s procedures for requesting additional consideration and that she’d had lots of time to make the provider aware of her circumstances and seek support but hadn’t done so.
The student complained to us. During our review we contacted the provider to discuss our initial view of the complaint. We explained we were concerned that the provider hadn’t made a proper assessment taking account of the specific facts of the case, about whether it would be reasonable to exercise discretion in the student’s case. We thought that the rigid application of its procedures may have resulted in an outcome for the student that was unreasonable in the circumstances. The events had been ongoing for some time and the student had explained they’d only recently felt able to speak about what had happened to them after a different colleague made a similar disclosure. We noted that delayed disclosure of circumstances of this nature was not uncommon, and providers may therefore need to consider whether it would be reasonable to exercise discretion in cases involving these kinds of disclosure. We also noted the GP’s letter indicated that the student’s ability to decide whether they were fit to sit would have been affected at the time they submitted their dissertation.
The provider reconsidered its decision on the student’s appeal and offered the student a further attempt at the dissertation. The student accepted the provider’s offer and the complaint to us was Settled.