Law1110 Legal Institutional Methods Assessment Answer

Question:

Agatha Peters is a student and lives in a university hall of residence at Neverland University (NU). Agatha’s hearing deteriorated during the first semester and she became completely deaf by the end of December. She applied for and was allocated a hearing dog from Canine Companions for the Deaf to help her through daily life.

She then wrote on 23 January 2020 to the Student Housing Committee of NU to let them know that she intended to have the dog live with her in the hall of residence. Before doing so she spoke to the NU Disability Officer, who is a member of the Student Housing Committee, who assured her that it would not be a problem, saying “Of course the dog will be able to live with you. It is clear that you are disabled and need it with you as an assistance animal. I can’t imagine there will be any issue.” Agatha was also aware that a blind student had been allowed to have a guide dog living in the halls the year before. For these reasons, Agatha was surprised to receive a letter two weeks later, stating:

Dear Ms Peters

The Student Housing Committee met on 30 January 2020 to consider your letter regarding your intention to have a dog live in your room at the hall of residence on a permanent basis.

Authority for decision

In reaching its decision, the Student Housing Committee relies on the Student Housing Regulations 2018 made under the Student Housing Act 2016 [fictitious]:

i) Every university is required to establish a Student Housing Committee.
ii) The Student Housing Committee is authorised to hear complaints, make determinations, and reply to other correspondence from students living in halls of residence;
iii) The purpose of the Student Housing Committee is to ensure that all students who live in student halls of residence receive the best possible conditions for furthering their studies.
iv) In carrying out its functions, the Student Housing Committee
a) may create policies to guide the exercise of those functions;
b) must have regard to the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 2018  [fictitious].

Reasons for decision

We had regard to information provided by Consuela Smee-Whibbles, the President of the Cats Are Great League, who gave oral evidence on the likely impact of the dog on the other residents. Her evidence was that dogs are smelly, dirty creatures which are prone to barking. This will disturb the other students and stop them from studying. This is a crucial point.

We also had regard to our Animals on Campus (Halls) policy. This was introduced by the Committee in 2019 after a student was bitten by another student’s pet snake. The policy states that the only animals which are allowed on campus are wild creatures such as mice, birds, foxes and squirrels. No other animals are permitted. This is to stop the halls of residence resembling a zoo. As the dog is not a wild creature, we must decline your application.