Abrahart V University Of Bristol //free\\ Jun 2026

Mrs. Justice Eady DBE found in favor of the Claimants (Ms. Abrahart’s parents) on the claim for under Section 15 of the Equality Act 2010. Key findings included:

The crisis came in the spring of 2018. The physics course required students to conduct a series of laboratory experiments. These were assessed through "oral assessments"—essentially, a student had to stand in front of an examiner and explain their work. abrahart v university of bristol

In February 2024, the High Court upheld a ruling finding the University of Bristol liable for disability discrimination following the 2018 suicide of student Natasha Abrahart. The judgment affirmed that institutions must make reasonable adjustments to assessments when aware of a student's distress, rejecting arguments that rigid oral assessments constitute a necessary competency standard. For an analysis of the legal implications, visit Weightmans . Key findings included: The crisis came in the

Natasha’s father, Robert Abrahart, was devastated. But as he reviewed the circumstances of his daughter's death, he became convinced that the university had failed in its duty of care. He launched a legal battle against the University of Bristol, arguing that they had discriminated against Natasha due to her disability. In February 2024, the High Court upheld a

“The claimant was not asking for a ‘soft option’; she was asking for a way of demonstrating her learning and understanding that did not expose her to a trigger for her panic attacks.” (Para 245)