A-levels: not even a panic attack justifies failing to speak during the oral exam

In the court’s view, the assessment of the oral interview and the awarding of the corresponding marks fall within the scope of the committee’s technical and discretionary powers.

Furthermore, in the judges’ view, a panic attack does not justify the possibility of retaking the exam, which may only be granted when, ‘during the course of the examination, a candidate is wholly or partially unable to continue or complete the examination’. In this particular case, the student had already completed the exam in full and, in any event, had been granted extra time to catch up.

On a formal level, moreover, in recent years many students have complained about the lack of justification for marks, which are often expressed as a single number. One student took legal action, challenging the examination board’s failure to take his status into account. However, the Veneto Regional Administrative Court (judgement 1538 of 10 September 2025) reiterated that the numerical mark summarises the technical and discretionary assessment and contains its own justification.

Similarly, the status of high-level student-athlete does not guarantee automatic progression to the next year. Students in such cases may benefit from certain forms of support, such as scheduled assessments, but they are not exempt from demonstrating that they possess the minimum skills required for the diploma. The Marche Regional Administrative Court, in its ruling 381 of 19 April 2024, also confirmed that no further written explanations are required if the assessment is based on predetermined criteria.

Particular attention is paid to pupils with specific learning difficulties (SLD). However, the lack of cooperation from parents is also a factor. The Campania Regional Administrative Court, in fact, rejected the appeal of a student who complained about the failure to apply compensatory measures, noting that the family had repeatedly refused to sign the Personalised Education Plan (PEP) during the year. The judges clarified that, in the face of a documented refusal by the parents, the school cannot be held in breach of duty for failing to adopt such measures during examinations (judgement 6261 of 8 May 2024). Finally, the reference to difficulties linked to the pandemic period or ‘long Covid’ was deemed irrelevant by the Emilia Romagna Regional Administrative Court, unless supported by timely documentation demonstrating a direct impact on the candidate’s cognitive abilities during the examinations (judgment 149 of 17 February 2025).

Not even a poor relationship with a teacher on the examination board can constitute valid grounds for challenging a failure in the school-leaving examination, provided the decision is properly justified (Lazio Regional Administrative Court judgment no. 5722 of 20 March 2025).

Scuola, tutti gli approfondimenti

La newsletter di Scuola+

Professionisti, dirigenti, docenti e non docenti, amministratori pubblici, operatori ma anche studenti e le loro famiglie possono informarsi attraverso Scuola+, la newsletter settimanale de Il Sole 24 Ore che mette al centro del sistema d'istruzione i suoi reali fruitori. La ricevi, ogni lunedì nel tuo inbox. Ecco come abbonarsi

Le guide e i data base

Come scegliere l’Università e i master? Ecco le guide a disposizione degli abbonati a Scuola+ o a 24+. Qui la guida all’università con le lauree del futuro e il database con tutti i corsi di laura

Lo speciale ITS

Il viaggio del Sole 24 Ore negli Its per scoprire come intrecciare al meglio la formazione con le opportunità di lavoro nei distretti produttivi delle eccellenze del made in Italy. Tutti i servizi