A MEDICAL student has lost his High Court challenge to a refusal by the Freedom of Information commissioner to release copies of his exam papers. It was claimed the papers would show he had obtained higher marks.
Michael Kruse, a fourth year medical student in UCD, brought proceedings claiming the commissioner erred in law by refusing to release the papers under the Freedom of Information Act.
Mr Kruse sought four documents relating to two examinations he sat in UCD in 2006. The college had refused to give him copies on grounds that to do so would threaten the integrity of a multiple-choice question format which could be used in future.
The college had agreed to allow him to inspect the papers in the presence of an exam module co-ordinator and it was found Mr Kruse was entitled to a 1.25 per cent improvement in his result. However, that did not affect the grade he had obtained.
Mr Kruse claimed he had identified at least six errors in the marking and he appealed to Information Commissioner Emily O’Reilly.
She upheld UCD’s decision and he then instituted High Court proceedings claiming Ms O’Reilly had no evidential basis to conclude the release of the exam papers would prejudice the effectiveness of the exams and was not in the public interest.
Yesterday, Mr Justice Garrett Sheehan found the commissioner had sufficient evidence before her to conclude UCD had identified a potential harm to its functions.
Ms O’Reilly was entitled to conclude Mr Kruse could query a presumed answer on his paper, for the purpose of an appeal, without having a copy of it, the judge said.
An examination of the commissioner’s decision disclosed ample evidence enabling her to conclude that public interest arguments in favour of not releasing the records outweighed those in favour of release, the judge said.