��ݮ����Ƶ����

Student Non-Academic Misconduct means conduct that is prohibited as outlined in Appendix 1: Prohibited Conduct of the Student Non-Academic Misconduct Policy. [See the definition section (Section 3.1) of the Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy]

For information about appeal terminology and for FAQs, please click here.  For information on the appeal process and timelines, please click here.

First Level of Appeal

If you want to appeal a Hearing Officer or Hearing Board decision that you are responsible for Student Non-Academic Misconduct, please review the Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy and the University Appeals Committee Procedure.  You may submit an appeal to the University Appeals Committee if you:

• have relevant new information that could not have been presented to the Hearing Officer or Hearing Board, and that may have affected the Hearing Officer’s or Hearing Board’s decision if it had been presented,
• are alleging that the Hearing Officer’s or Hearing Board’s decision was made in a procedurally unfair way [refer to the definition of “procedural fairness” in the Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy],
• are alleging there was a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of a person who made the Hearing Officer’s or Hearing Board’s decision,
• are alleging the Hearing Officer or Hearing Board did not have the authority to make the decision or to impose sanctions,
• are alleging that the decision, or the severity of the sanction, or both, is unreasonable, or
• are alleging any other ground of appeal [See Section 5.6 of the Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy].

You are responsible to satisfy the University Appeals Committee that your evidence or position is more likely than not to have occurred or to be accurate.  This is referred to as the balance of probabilities standard of proof [See Section 4.11 of the University Appeals Committee Procedure]. Note that feeling dissatisfied with a decision is not a ground to appeal.

Second Level of Appeal

If you want to appeal a University Appeals Committee decision that has confirmed that you are responsible for Student Non-Academic Misconduct, please review the Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy and the University Appeals Tribunal Procedure.  You may submit an appeal to the University Appeals Tribunal if you:

• have relevant new information that could not have been presented to the University Appeals Committee and that may have affected the University Appeals Committee’s decision if it had been presented,
• are alleging that the University Appeals Committee’s decision was made in a procedurally unfair way [refer to the definition of “procedural fairness” in the Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy],
• are alleging there was a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of a person who made the University Appeals Committee decision,
• are alleging the University Appeals Committee did not have the authority to make the decision or to impose sanctions,
• are alleging that the decision, or the severity of the sanction, or both, is unreasonable, or
• are alleging any other ground of appeal [See Section 5.6 of the Student Misconduct and Academic Appeals Policy].

You are responsible to satisfy the University Appeals Tribunal that your evidence or position is more likely than not to have occurred or to be accurate. This is referred to as the balance of probabilities standard of proof [See Section 4.11 of the University Appeals Tribunal Procedure]. Note that feeling dissatisfied with a decision is not a ground to appeal.

The University Appeals Tribunal is the final level of appeal at the University for appeals involving Non-Academic Misconduct decisions.