A FEW years ago, two law undergraduates took me to task for not awarding them a first-class mark in an assessment on the equity and trusts course I was teaching at Lancaster University.

The second-year students had researched for and then taken part in a moot - a mock trial - on an arcane area of equity law relating to half-secret trusts; and while they had acquitted themselves reasonably confidently in their presentation, they had failed to employ any legal analysis and had produced a piece of work derived entirely from the set textbooks for the course. The mark I gave them reflected this; it was a 2:1 mark and, if anything, over-generous.

The two female students came to see me, and they were politely furious that I had dared to give them anything other than a first for this (in their opinion) magnificent piece of academic work. They eventually demanded that it should be re-marked by someone higher up in the department. It was - and their mark was reduced (I had indeed been over-generous).

All of which leads me to the case of a former history student called Faiz Siddiqui, who made the national news last week for failing in his attempt to sue Oxford University for awarding him a 2:1. This "poor" result deprived him of the first-class degree to which he felt entitled, the lack of which, he argued, cost him a career as a high-flying lawyer.

Sensibly, High Court judge Mr Justice Foskett threw out Mr Siddiqui's case, and ruled that his university tutors could not be at fault for his failure to get a first. Dismissing the case, the judge said Mr Siddiqui (who since leaving Oxford has had a string of short-lived jobs with law firms which complained variously of his "poor behaviour, rudeness and lack of IT skills") could not blame his teachers, adding he "has a very significant track record for looking for someone else or some other factor to blame for any failure on his part to achieve what he perceives to be the right result for him." Well said, that judge. Two main issues regarding higher education are at play here, I think.

First, there is the fact that too many students expect to be spoon-fed through their degrees. Students are at university to study - not to be given exam crib sheets via a series of bullet points on handouts. The point of being at university is to stretch one's mind, to engage in independent thought and research and to form one's own arguments and conclusions.

Unfortunately, with nearly half the population now going into the university system, and with £9,000-a-year fees at even the poorest-performing institutions, students are demanding value for money (in other words a top-class degree) and too many are viewing the university experience in merely contractual terms where - as with Mr Siddiqui - if it doesn't live up to one's expectations (and no matter how arrogant and unrealistic those expectations may be), suing the university in question is the obvious remedy.

Mr Siddiqui was obviously bright enough to get to Oxford; and bright enough to get a 2:1. But he wasn't perhaps as bright as he believed himself to be - and maybe his unfortunate manner didn't help him achieve what he felt he was entitled to achieve.

Second is the issue of rampant grade inflation in awarding degrees - a practice which the Office for Students is investigating. Persistent grade inflation at British universities over recent years has seen the number of students being awarded top degrees rise by 40 per cent in just four years - the number of first class degrees has increased five-fold in the past two decades.

The result of this is that the Mr Siddiquis of this world expect to get first-class degrees - and are prepared to litigate their way towards one if traditional methods (ie actually being a first-class student) fail. First-class degrees should be reserved for the absolute brightest and highest-performing students. They should not be handed out like sweets to students who do not deserve them.

Thankfully, the judge in this case took the sensible decision to throw it out of court, advising Mr Siddiqui to "lower his expectations". And that is at the crux of all this: too many young people expect everything they want to come their way as of by right - and if it doesn't, well, they'll sue.