Date:
February 28, 2025
Parties:
University of Toronto v. N.X.
Hearing Date:
December 3, 2024
Members of the Panel:
Nader Hasan, Chair
Professor Michael Saini, Faculty Panel Member
Liwei Liao, Student Panel Member
Appearances:
Lily Harmer, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
Chloe Hendrie, Assistant Discipline Counsel, Paliare Roland Rosenberg Rothstein LLP
Antone Liu, Representative for the Student, L&B LLP
Hearing Secretary:
Samanthe Huang, Coordinator & Hearing Secretary, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances
In Attendance:
The Student
The Student was charged with three counts knowingly forging or in any other way altering or falsifying a document or evidence required by the University of Toronto, or uttering, circulating, or making use of such forged, altered or falsified document, namely three Verification of Student Illness or Injury Forms (the “VOI Forms”) in support of a request for a deferred exam in MGEA02H3 (the “Course”), contrary to section B.i.1(a) of the Code.
The hearing proceeded on the basis of an Agreed Statement of Facts (the “ASF”). The ASF detailed that the Student submitted three VOI Forms, all purportedly signed by the same doctor (the “Doctor”) on three different dates, in support of a petition to write a deferred final exam in the course. The Student admitted in the ASF that they had never been a patient of the Doctor and had purchased the three VOIs from a third-party commercial provider of forged and falsified documents. The Student admitted to the three charges under section B.i.1(a) of the Code. Based on the facts and admissions in the ASF, the Panel concluded that the Student was guilty of three counts of knowingly forging or in any other way altering or falsifying a document or evidence required by the University, or uttering, circulating or making use of such forged, altered or falsified document, contrary to Section B.I.1(a) of the Code.
In determining the appropriate sanction, the Panel considered a Joint Submission on Penalty submitted by the Student and the University. The Panel observed that while the offence committed by the Student was serious, there were mitigating factors to consider, namely the Student’s cooperation with the disciplinary process and expression of remorse. The Panel concluded, based on its review of prior relevant decisions of the Tribunal, that the JSP was reasonable.
The Panel imposed the following sanction: a final grade of zero in the Course; a three-year suspension from the University; and a three-year and ten-month notation on the Student’s academic record and transcript.