In Hamon & ors v University College London, a judge has paused a multi-million-pound group action claim against University College London (UCL) over changes in teaching during the pandemic and industrial action disruption and has instead directed that the parties try first to resolve their claim out of court.
Students Sue University Over Pandemic and Strike Disruption
Earlier this year, a group litigation order (GLO) application was made in the High Court on behalf of 924 current and former UCL students. A GLO is a case management procedure that permits multiple claims sharing common or related issues to be dealt with as a single claim. The students claimed that the university was in breach of its contract by not providing the in-person tuition they had paid for between 2017 and 2022 as a result of the pandemic and strike action. They were therefore seeking compensation from the university, in particular, a partial repayment of their tuition fees for this period.
UCL argued that the case should instead be ‘stayed’ or put on hold so that it can be resolved out of court. UCL operates a scheme that allows students to lodge a complaint with the university and then if necessary, with the Office of Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education - which is designated under the Higher Education Act - and can recommend compensation awards.
High Courts Paused the Claim to Encourage ADR
Senior Master Fontaine, sitting in the High Court, agreed to stay the proceedings for eight months but did not make a mandatory order for the claimants to engage in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), as requested by UCL. She did, however, encourage the parties ‘in the strongest possible terms to use that time to attempt construction discussions either through the ready-made ADR process that is available, or another ADR process, to try and save time and avoid costly group litigation. She was particularly concerned about the costs that might be involved in this case, given that the claimant’s statement of costs for the one-day GLO application hearing was £227,454.71 and UCL’s statement was £329,432.96.
The stay has been granted for eight months and halfway through this period, either party can apply to lift the stay if sufficient progress with ADR has not been made. Senior Master Fontaine, however, commented that the GLO could not be taken forward in its current form and that more information was needed to enable the identification of GLO issues as well as the cohorts of claimants before the claim gets to court.
It will be interesting to see whether this claim does ultimately proceed to trial as its eventual outcome is likely to set a precedent for similar claims against other universities around the country. For more news and updates, follow our blog.
Image by Drazen Zigic on Freepik
