Council of State overturns thesis mark after points deduction
A Leiden student will receive a new assessment after examiners deducted one point for a thesis submitted 79 hours late.
The Council of State has overturned the assessment of a master's thesis at Leiden University. The examiners were permitted to take the late submission into account, but according to the highest administrative court they did not sufficiently explain why precisely one point had been deducted.
The case concerns a student on the Master's degree programme in Law, Civil Law department, at Leiden University. The thesis had to be submitted by 12 noon on 6 June 2025. The student submitted a provisional version that day and said he intended to continue working on the final version during the Whitsun weekend.
The first reader then wrote that he was inclined to allow the student to complete the thesis during the weekend and assess the final version afterwards. That version was submitted on 9 June, 79 hours after the deadline, according to the judgment. The examiners initially considered the thesis worthy of a 9, but set the final mark at 8.
The examiners cited limited planning and the principle that the student should not gain an advantage over students who had complied with the deadline, among other reasons for the deduction. The university's Board of Appeal for Examinations upheld that decision.
The Administrative Law Division of the Council of State agrees with the university on one important point: a late submission can be taken into account in certain circumstances. The court accepts that equal treatment of students can play a role, even though there was no explicit rule prescribing a deduction of precisely one point.
According to the judgment, however, the reasoning was inadequate. The student had not been clearly told that the extent of the delay could determine the size of the deduction. The Council of State did not consider his statement that he would have submitted earlier had he known this to be inherently implausible. As a result, there was no sufficiently substantiated explanation for why the deduction had to be one point.
The Council of State annulled the decision of the university's appeal board and the original assessment. The examiners must take a new decision within six weeks. The judgment therefore does not automatically give the student a 9; the substantive assessment must be determined again within the limits set by the court.
The case highlights the importance of assessment rules being known in advance, but it does not automatically change all deadlines or sanctions in higher education. Universities may still impose requirements concerning planning and timely submission. Under this judgment, however, students must be able to understand what consequences will be attached to missing a deadline.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The student submitted the final thesis 79 hours after the deadline.
- The examiners deducted one point and awarded an 8.
- The Council of State found the reasoning for deducting precisely one point inadequate and ordered a new decision.
Left
Arguments Emphasises that students can only be assessed fairly when rules are clear in advance, verifiable and applied equally.
Values Legal protection, transparency and preventing arbitrariness within institutions.
Consequences Fears that unclear sanctions primarily disadvantage students who are less able to navigate university procedures.
Centre
Arguments Wants to recognise both students' responsibility for deadlines and institutions' duty to set clear assessment criteria.
Values Proportionality, predictability and professional implementation of education policy.
Consequences Sees scope for sanctions when work is submitted late, but expects their level to be explainable in advance and determined consistently.
Right
Arguments Emphasises that deadlines are part of responsibility and that extra time can disadvantage other students.
Values Equal treatment, discipline and the reliability of academic standards.
Consequences Fears that excessive judicial intervention will limit universities' discretion in assessment and make leniency less self-evident.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The full judgment of the Council of State confirms the factual core and the legal outcome. The text makes clear that the student has no automatic right to a 9 and that a new assessment will follow.
- confirmed The thesis had to be submitted by 12 noon on 6 June 2025 and the final version arrived 79 hours late. — Both details appear in the Council of State's judgment. source
- confirmed The examiners initially considered the thesis worth a 9 and set the mark at 8 after deducting one point. — The basis for the assessment is described in the judgment. source
- confirmed The Council of State annulled both the decision of the university's appeal board and the original assessment. — This is stated in the operative part of the judgment. source
- confirmed The examiners must take a new decision within six weeks. — The deadline is stated in section V of the operative part. source
- confirmed The student does not automatically receive a 9. — The court annulled the assessment and ordered a new decision; it did not itself set a new mark. source
Editor's note
The deadline, the extent of the delay, the original marks and the Council of State's decision are certain. Uncertainty remains about the final new assessment: the examiners still have to take a new decision.Sources
- Uitspraak 202600842/1/A2, ECLI:NL:RVS:2026:5477 — Raad van State
- ECLI:NL:RVS:2026:5477 — Semantius
- Student stapt naar rechter vanwege punt aftrek voor te laat ingeleverde scriptie — Onderwijsnieuwsdienst
More on this in Dutch media
- de Volkskrant — „onderwijs universiteit leiden”
- RTL Nieuws — „onderwijs universiteit leiden”
- NOS — „onderwijs universiteit leiden”