News / The University of Bristol
Bristol university loses appeal in Natasha Abrahart case
The High Court has rejected the University of Bristol’s appeal against an earlier judgement that it contributed to the death of a student by discriminating against her.
Natasha Abrahart took her own life on April 30, 2018, the day that she was due to give a presentation to fellow students and staff in a 329-seat lecture theatre.
The second-year physics student had been diagnosed with chronic Social Anxiety Disorder in February of the same year and was at least the tenth student at the University of Bristol to take their own life since October 2016.
is needed now More than ever
Speaking outside Bristol Civil Justice Centre on Wednesday, Natasha’s father, Robert Abrahart, said it has been “a long and painful journey to get this far”. Her mother, Margaret Abrahart, made a direct appeal to vice chancellor Evelyn Welch, saying “we don’t want sympathy, we want action”.
Welch has responded to the ruling to say she is “deeply sorry for the Abrahart family’s loss” and outlining steps the university has taken to prioritise students’ mental wellbeing, ackowledging “there is always more to do”.
Natasha’s father brought a legal case against the university alleging it had contributed to his daughter’s death by discriminating against her on the grounds of disability contrary to the Equality Act 2010, by breaching a duty of care owed her under the law of negligence.
In May 2022, judge Alex Ralton ruled that the university had discriminated against Natasha, and that this contributed to her death.
Ralton found that the university had: breached its duty to make reasonable adjustments to the way it assessed Natasha; engaged in indirect disability discrimination against Natasha; and treated Natasha unfavourably because of the consequences of her disability.
The university was ordered to pay damages of £50,519, reflecting the injury to Natasha, the deterioration of her mental health caused by the university and funeral costs.
Natasha Abrahart took her own life on April 30, 2018, the day that she was due to give a presentation to fellow students and staff in a 329-seat lecture theatre – photo: Abrahart family
On Wednesday, judge Ralton ruled that the university had failed on all seven grounds of its appeal, including its argument that an oral presentation assessment Natasha had been due to be assessed on that day was “a core competency of a professional scientist”.
Ralton said the court could not rule on Robert and Margaret Arbahart’s counter appeal which asked for a more general precedent that universities have a duty of care for all students, however.
The judge found that it would not be “fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty of care [on the university] to Natasha [in negligence] because, as a disabled student … she is afforded protection by the Equality Act 2010”.
Speaking after the ruling, Robert Abrahart, a retired university lecturer, said: “It has been a long and painful journey to reach this point, and the university of Bristol has fought us every step of the way.
“The result is that we now have a judgement from the High Court confirming what we always knew to be true. The University of Bristol failed our daughter, broke the law, and contributed to her death.
“Their arguments that they did not know enough about Natasha’s problems, or that they hadn’t received the right paperwork, or that fairness to other students meant they couldn’t make the adjustments she needed, have now all failed for a second time.
“It is now for the University of Bristol, and higher education institutions across the country, to get their houses in order.”
View this post on Instagram
Margaret Abrahart, a retired psychological wellbeing practitioner, directed her statement directly to Evelyn Welch.
She said: “It’s time to stop this. Don’t instruct your layers to pursue another pointless appeal. Don’t delay any longer. Please stop your PR machine from issuing another press release about how the university would ‘once again like to extend our sympathy to Natasha’s friends and family’. We don’t need or want your sympathy. We want action.
“We want you to think how you would want your son or daughter to be treated at university if they were disabled and needed their rights protected.
“Five years and nine months after Natasha’s death, say sorry to us. We’re waiting.”
Responding to the judgement, Welch, vice-chancellor and president of the university, said: “Natasha’s death is a tragedy – I am deeply sorry for the Abrahart family’s loss.
“At Bristol, we care profoundly for all our students and their mental health and wellbeing is a priority and is at the heart of everything we do. We continue to develop and improve our services and safeguards to support our students who need help.
“In appealing, we were seeking clarity for the Higher Education sector around the application of the Equality Act when staff do not know a student has a disability, or when it has yet to be diagnosed. We will work with colleagues across the sector as we consider the judgment.
“I am grateful to our dedicated colleagues who work tirelessly to support all our students and to those who specifically supported Natasha which included a referral to the NHS.
“Higher Education staff across the country share our deep concern about the increase of mental health issues amongst young people, and with that rise comes the increasing importance that staff, students, and their families are clear on what support universities can and should provide, and that students receive appropriate specialist care under the NHS should they need it.
“In 2022 Bristol became one of the first universities to receive the university Mental Health Charter Award, which recognises the continued hard work of our staff and students in terms of taking a strong, structured approach towards improving mental health and wellbeing across our university.
“We know there is always more to do, and we will keep working to achieve the best for everyone in our community.”
Robert and Margaret said they would continue to campaign for Parliament to pass a statutory duty of care.
The statue would requiring all universities to act with reasonable care and skill so as to avoid causing harm to students, extending the legal protection for students beyond the Equalities Act.
Main photo: Mia Vines Booth
Read next:
Our top newsletters emailed directly to you
