Can universities legally deny practical lab access to registered students under ambiguous status classifications like FM/CV?

Detailed Description (Body):

I am a medical student and whistleblower currently involved in a legal and administrative case concerning denied access to anatomy dissection labs at Semmelweis University in Hungary. Despite holding a valid FM (re-registration) or CV (continuing validation) of the signature for the course Macroscopy Anatomy and Embrology II after the exam period. My student status was full time active registered with 23 credit hours and having paid full tuition, I was barred from cadaver dissection sessions between February and May 2025. This occurred under the pretext of needing to “revoke” a previously granted course signature—an action unsupported by any clause in the university’s internal SZMSZ (Study and Examination Regulations).

The issue escalated into a formal legal dispute, now under review by the Hungarian Ombudsman (Case No. EBF–AJBH–309–2025) and the Hungarian Administrative Court (Case No. 7. Kpk.750.239/2025/2). I've documented this case in a whistleblower study available here:

on Research gate - pre print

My question aims to explore the legal and ethical limits of university discretion in denying access to essential academic resources based on unclear status classifications. I am particularly interested in whether:

• FM or CV status can be used to justify exclusion from required practical components
• Universities may impose requirements like signature revocation without written policy support
• EU or Hungarian law offers protection in such cases (e.g., Act CCIV of 2011, Act XXV of 2023)

Any feedback from legal scholars, higher education administrators, or international students who’ve encountered similar institutional behavior is welcome.