R AW v St George's, University of London
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Anthony Elleray |
| Judgment Date | 25 June 2020 |
| Neutral Citation | [2020] EWHC 1647 (Admin) |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Docket Number | Case No: CO/2321/2019 |
| Date | 25 June 2020 |
[2020] EWHC 1647 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Anthony Elleray QC Deputy High Court Judge
Case No: CO/2321/2019
Rory Dunlop QC (instructed by Doyle Clayton) for the Claimant
Aileen McColgan (instructed by Kennedys) for the Defendant
Hearing dates: 18 and 21 February 2020
Approved Judgment
Anthony Elleray QC Deputy High Court Judge:
The Claimant is “AW”. She has been represented before me by Mr Dunlop QC.
The Defendant is “SGUL”. It has been represented before me by Ms McColgan.
AW was registered with SGUL on a Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (“MBBS”) course. On 12 March 2019 SGUL decided to terminate her registration. The Decision Letter was served on 3 April 2019.
AW seeks Judicial Review of:
(1) the termination;
(2) the failure to warn her that her registration might be terminated;
(3) the refusal to (a) hear a complaint about the determination decision or (b) issue her with a Completion of Procedure (“COP”) letter as required by the rules of the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (“OIA”).
SGUL denies the grounds of complaint. It nonetheless asserts that if grounds are made out, relief should be refused under s.31(2A) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 as it is “highly unlikely that the outcome of Applicant would have been substantially different if the conduct complained of had not occurred.”
Principal Events
In September 2012 AW started a four year MBBS course at SGUL's Hospital Medical School.
AW passed her first and second year examinations in 2013 and 2014.
In August 2014 AW began her third year, the “P Year”.
Regulations for the MBBS Programme in Medicine were in place.
Regulation 6.1 provided:
“In accordance with General Medical Council rules and European Union Council Directive 2005/36, Article 24, the MBBS (both the 4 year and 5 year streams) and the F1 Foundation Year 1 following shall, taken together, consist of not less than 5,500 hours of theoretical and practical instruction.”
Regulation 6.4 relating to the 4 year stream provided:
“For the 4 year stream, a student shall be required to complete not less than 4 academic years study which shall, in accordance with University London Regulation 1 (Section C), be at least 45 months from initial enrolment to graduation.”
Regulation 7.1.4 dealing with the 4 year stream provided:
“This comprises Year 1, Year 2 (Transition (T) Year), Year 3 (Penultimate (P) Year) and Year 4 (Final (F) Year).
Regulation 7.1.5 provided:
“Year 1 is called Clinical Science: Year 2 (T Year), Year 3 (P Year) and Year 4 (F Year) will be called Clinical Practice.”
Regulation 7.8.1 provided:
“The structure of the Penultimate Year shall be as follows:
Up to and including 2014–15
There will be seven 6 week clinical attachments as follows:
• Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Paediatrics
• Neurology/Disability/Stroke/Palliative Care
• Psychiatry
• Medicine and Cardiology
• Surgery and AMU
• Specialities and MSS From 2015–16 onwards
There will be clinical attachments as follows:
• Introduction to Clinical Practice (four one week blocks)
• Integrated Medical Specialities and AMW (10 weeks)
• Integrated Surgery Specialities and Palliative Care (10 weeks)
• Obstetrics and Gynaecology (5 weeks)
• Paediatrics (5 weeks)
• Neurology (5 weeks)
• Psychiatry (5 weeks)
• Advanced Clinical Practice (ACP) (1 week).”
The P Year students were streamed in relation to the clinical attachments. I understand AW was on the B stream. Her last attachment was in June 2015.
On 1 July 2015 AW had a kidney scan which revealed a left renal lesion. AW says she was given a working diagnosis of renal cancer needing a biopsy.
On 13, 17, 20 and 21 July 2015 AW took her P Year exams. On 29 July 2015 AW's results were published. She had failed relatively narrowly.
Between 3 and 5 August 2015 AW re-sat those exams as she was entitled to do. But again she failed narrowly.
In September 2015 AW began to re-take the P Year as agreed by SGUL.
On 4 December 2015 AW was emailed by Dr Ibison, the Deputy Director of Students of SGUL, referring to her undertaking a formal needs assessment with the Occupational Health Team (“OH”). The email stressed why a needs assessment was necessary including medical evidence where appropriate. The email referred to the disability needs assessment process. On 9 December 2015 SGUL's Disability Adviser submitted a request for reasonable adjustment on AW's behalf in respect of amongst other matters medical absences for her disability. Correspondence between AW and SGUL continued that month concerning further evidence.
On 2 March 2016 AW applied for an Interruption of Studies (“IOS”). The background was that she had been offered and wished to take up treatment for her disability in France. On 7 March 2016 AW began 10 weeks' absence for treatment and recovery. On 21 March 2016 a French biopsy report identified renal cell carcinoma. On 2 June 2016 AW was informed that she could not return to her P Year course because an Interruption of Studies period had begun and absent OH confirmation that she was fit to do so. On 22 June 2016 AW wrote to Professor Higham, the University Principal at SGUL, complaining about the need for an IOS when a sickness of more than four weeks occurred, IOS policy being interpreted to bar participation in a year if the student had had more than four weeks' absence.
On 12 January 2017 SGUL made an OH referral relating to AW. She saw an OH Locum on 20 February 2017, but he left without producing a report. On 15 August 2017 Dr Thayalan, a Consultant Occupational Physician contracted with SGUL, wrote to Ms Philippa Tostevin, then Course Director of MBBS (she is now Professor). He referred to AW suffering from a medical condition that required treatment and monitoring at a specialist centre in France and then a specialist unit in the UK. Follow-up and monitoring would go through her medical training period. He referred to the 2016 treatment and three monthly reviews until April 2017. He indicated that her condition would require periodic review in French and UK units and the then planned reviews including then planned reviews in 2017 and early 2018. He considered that AW was “currently fit for training”. He indicated that required adjustments/support would enable her to be given time off to attend clinic and assessment appointments in France and UK specialist units. He also mentioned a knee condition. He planned an update in October 2017. On 17 August 2017, he emailed his report to Ms Tostevin. He did conduct telephone reviews in October 2017. On 27 November 2017 AW's then solicitors (Sinclairs) wrote to Ms Tostevin referring to the want of a response to Dr Thayalan's report. On 15 December 2017 SGUL replied stating they were awaiting Dr Thayalan's update admitting that he should have been contacted after his earlier, ie August 2017, report. On 18 December 2017 Dr Thayalan sent his updated OH report to Ms Tostevin and AW.
On 24 January 2018 SGUL through Joanna Carroll, its Head of Clinical Medicine Administration and International MBBS, wrote to AW. She referred to having discussed AW's request with Ms Tostevin who had read both Dr Thayalan's reports and had asked her to formulate a reply. Ms Tostevin had informed her that both reports stated AW was fit to return to study but the reports did not contain any medical details and the only recommendations stipulated that she might need to attend clinical appointments abroad. She said, “I am happy to confirm that we'll be able to accommodate this reasonable adjustment.” She said that any reasonable request for absence from clinical placements would be considered in line with the MBBS attendance policy. She indicated that exact practical arrangements for taking time off would need to be agreed with the relevant speciality lead. She set out that the academic and clinical leads would discuss the request and agree whether any of the time missed would need to be remediated to ensure AW did not miss out on any teaching and could be successfully signed off for the placement. On 24 January 2018 AW replied (to Yeshiaka Sharan to whom the 24.01.18 letter had been copied). She took issue with the letter not dealing with any necessary time away which might go beyond four weeks. Her email set out that she did not consent to Ms Tostevin disclosing the OH reports or their contents to anyone. She sought a reply by Ms Tostevin to the letter of Sinclairs on 27 November 2016 so as to set out the response to reasonable adjustments required in Dr Thayalan's OH reports. On 31 January 2018 Ms Carroll replied that MBBS attendance policy did stipulate that no more than 20% of the required contact hours could be missed. On 16 February 2018 AW again wrote to Ms Sharan stating that the proposals on 31 January 2018 of the MBBS Programme Team were unclear. She made a number of complaints. Ms Carroll for SGUL replied on 12 March 2018. AW says that she was told on 26 March 2018 that an IOS was now necessary due to four weeks' plus absence. On 13 April 2018 Ms Carroll wrote again to AW. She observed that AW's expected date of return to study was 26 February 2018. She said that as AW had missed more than six weeks of her clinical experience it would not be possible to remediate that time during the remainder of the current academic year prior to the P Year exams. It was therefore necessary to extend the current period of interruption for another year. The Interruption of Studies Panel had approved the IOS extension until 25 th February 2019. Other points included AW's need to extend her registration.
On 3 June 2018 the Claimant issued a County Court claim against...
To continue reading
Request your trial