Facts
The appellant X. studied law at the University of Bern and wrote a master's thesis in the spring semester of 2008 with the title "The Prohibition of Abuse of Rights in European Community Law - A Study on the Case Law of the ECJ". The Faculty of Law of the University of Bern evaluated the thesis with the grade 5.0, which led to the overall predicate "magna cum laude". X. filed an appeal against this evaluation, requesting that the grade be set at 6.0 or at least 5.5.
The Administrative Court of the Canton of Bern dismissed the appeal. Thereupon, X. filed a subsidiary constitutional appeal to the Federal Supreme Court.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. It stated that the evaluation of the master's thesis with the grade 5.0 cannot be considered arbitrary. The examiner had classified the work as good, but not necessarily deserving of the highest grade. The Administrative Court had provided a comprehensible justification for this assessment and did not rely on irrelevant or obviously untenable considerations.
Furthermore, the Federal Supreme Court saw no violation of the right to be heard or the cognition powers of the…