AU will not pay compensation in UV radiation case involving students

The East Jutland Police have decided to close the investigation into the incident that led to large parts of the University Park being evacuated and closed off back in 2024. Students reported painful eyes as well as itchy and severely irritated skin during the night and morning of 22 October, and the situation was taken extremely seriously, as no one could initially explain the students' symptoms or how and where they had arisen.

Later that day, it became clear that the cause was a UV installation in the Social Sciences Canteen. The installation, which had been bought during the Covid-19 pandemic to disinfect the canteen overnight, had somehow been switched on during the day. Thus, students had been exposed to the UV light, resulting in eye and skin pain.

At a press conference on 22 October 2024, Assistant Commissioner Rene Raffo described it as a mistake that the system had been switched on during the day. He also dismissed the idea that anyone should be held responsible.

"Mistakes can happen, and it has happened in this case," said Rene Raffo.

23 students ended up having to seek medical treatment, and six students have since filed compensation claims against Aarhus University for pain and suffering.

Rejects students' claims

The students will not receive compensation, Lisbeth Katborg Bjerre, Chief of Staff in the Rector's Office, states in an internal news update for staff and students at Aarhus University.

As the police have closed the case on the grounds that further investigation is unlikely to lead to any charges, Aarhus University has decided to reject the students’ compensation claims, Lisbeth Katborg Bjerre explains.  

"As no liability on the part of Aarhus University can be established, the university does not have a legal basis for paying compensation or covering any expenses or losses the students have incurred as a result of the UV incident," she states in the news update. 

Omnibus has asked Lisbeth Katborg Bjerre whether the university’s decision to absolve itself of responsibility is based solely on the police’s decision to close the investigation.

She declined to speak to Omnibus, but writes:

“For a public authority to pay compensation, there must be a legal basis for liability. No information has come to light indicating that Aarhus University bears any responsibility. That is why we have concluded that there is no basis for liability, and we have therefore had to reject the compensation claims submitted by the six students.”

"A fundamental failure"

One of the students who was exposed to the UV light in the Social Sciences Canteen back in 2024 is Anders Kozuch. He woke up in the middle of the night with burning eyes and itching. He sought advice from his own doctor, the emergency department, and the poison control hotline before isolating himself at home.

He is not among the six students who have filed compensation claims, but he questions how it can be that no one appears to bear responsibility when 23 students are injured in one of the university’s canteens.

"Fundamentally, it is clearly a serious failure that something like this can happen without anyone being held responsible. What’s more, AU has every incentive to sweep the matter under the carpet and avoid additional costs in the form of compensation payments. That goes without saying,” says Anders Kozuch.

University director expressed regret

Back in 2024, University Director Kristian Thorn acknowledged that the installation should never have remained in the canteen when Omnibus asked whether it ought to have been removed once the Covid-19 pandemic was over. 

"I definitely believe it should have been removed. It was tested during the pandemic, and it would have been fitting to remove it afterwards. I want to apologise for not doing so," says Kristian Thorn.

University Director: UV disinfection system should have been removed after the COVID pandemic

The Chief of Staff does not elaborate on her initial response, despite the fact that the University Director previously acknowledged that the installation should have been removed and expressed regret that it had not been.

Lisbeth Katborg Bjerre also declined to comment on whether AU could, of its own accord, choose to accept responsibility and compensate the students, given the University Director’s previous acknowledgement that the UV installation should have been removed but, regrettably, was not.

In her email to Omnibus, however, the Chief of Staff expresses regret, as she did in the internal update to staff, that the six students have had to wait almost two years for an answer.

“We are very sorry that the students found themselves in a situation that caused them discomfort and concern. And we regret that they have had to wait so long for a response," she writes.

Cause is still unclear

Social sciences student Anders Kozuch describes the incident that Tuesday in October as an unpleasant experience and says he accepts the university’s decision to close the case.

“Fortunately, no one has suffered any lasting effects, so we probably have to acknowledge that it is not worth the money and resources to get too worked up about the incident at this point,” says Anders Kozuch.

According to Chief of Staff Lisbeth Katborg Bjerre, the six students who filed compensation claims have been informed directly that their claims have been rejected. 

It is still unclear why the UV system was switched on during the daytime.

According to the internal news update, “it appears that a technical fault was the reason the installation was operating in the canteen that afternoon”, although no source is given for that information.

"We are not aware of the cause," Chief of Staff Lisbeth Katborg Bjerre writes to Omnibus.

According to the news update, the UV system was removed in December. Meanwhile, a major renovation of the Social Sciences Canteen is currently under way, and the canteen is not expected to reopen until next year. 

Closure of canteen puts a strain on student volunteers

Omnibus has asked East Jutland Police why it took nearly two years for the police to close the case. At the time of publication, we have not received a response.

This text is machine translated and post-edited by Mie Skov Jeppesen.