Abrahart v University of Bristol
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 20 May 2022 |
| Subject Matter | Civil |
| Court | County Court |
-
FINAL
Claim No.: G10YX983
IN THE COUNTY COURT AT BRISTOL
B E T W E E N :
DR ROBERT ABRAHART
(Administrator of the estate of Natasha Abrahart decd)
Claimant
-and-
UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL
Defendant
JUDGMENT
Representation:
Claimant Mr Burton QC and Ms Steinhardt instructed by:
Irwin Mitchell LLP
Defendant Mr Stagg instructed by:
DAC Beachcroft
INTRODUCTION
1. This is a tragic case.
2. Natasha Abrahart, to whom I shall refer as ‘Natasha’, was an undergraduate
MSci student reading physics at the University of Bristol, to which I shall refer as
the ‘University’. Natasha started her course in the autumn of 2016.
3. During her second year, as part of her course, Natasha was required to give
interviews after conducting laboratory experiments. The interviews formed part
of the University’s assessment of Natasha and were marked. Natasha could not
cope with the interviews and her mental health swiftly declined.
4. On 30th April 2018, as part of her course, Natasha would ordinarily have been
expected to participate actively in a conference by way of presenting with fellow
students; instead, aged only 20, Natasha took her own life.
5. Natasha’s family believe that the University bears moral and legal responsibility
for Natasha’s psychological decline and suffering leading to her death because
it continued to require Natasha to deliver oral post laboratory interviews for
assessment purposes and to participate in the conference notwithstanding the
knowledge they say the University acquired of Natasha’s mental health problems
and the harm caused to her by the oral assessments.
6. Dr Robert Abrahart, the Claimant, is Natasha’s father and he brings the claims
under the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934 on behalf of
Natasha’s estate for damages under the Equality Act 2010 and at common law
in negligence and under the Fatal Accidents Act 1974 for the balance of
Natasha’s funeral expenses
1
.
1
A claim against the NHS resulted in (in effect) recovery of 71.6% of Natasha’s funeral expenses.
7. The University has expressed clearly its sorrow and sympathy for the loss of
Natasha but it denies that it is legally responsible in any way for her suffering and
death.
8. This court likewise extends its condolences to Natasha’s family.
9. The claim was issued on 22nd January 2020; it has been allocated to the multi-
track and came on for trial from 1st to 8th March 2022 before myself sitting with
Mrs Christine Price as lay assessor pursuant to section 114(7) of the Equality Act
2010 and section 63(1) of the County Courts Act 1984. In writing this judgment I
have taken into account the observations of Mrs Price
2
and this judgment has
been read by Mrs Price prior to sending it to the parties. I record my gratitude to
Mrs Price for her assistance and I observe that we have not differed on our
assessment of the case.
10. At trial the parties were represented by counsel as follows:
(a) Mr Burton QC and Ms Steinhardt appeared for the Claimant and
(b) Mr Stagg appeared for the University.
I am most grateful to all for their written and oral submissions.
11. Within this judgment I shall:
(1) Give general observations about the evidence;
(2) Describe the physics course taken by Natasha;
(3) Summarise the provision made for disability support;
(4) Mention confidentiality;
(5) Summarise the facts in the following chronological parts:
(a) 8th November 1997 to October 2016;
(b) October 2016 to October 2017;
(c) October 2017 to 30th April 2018;
(6) Mention Natasha’s personal notes;
(7) Consider the Claimant’s witness evidence;
2
With respect to the Equality Act claims.
To continue reading
Request your trial