Case #492

DATE: July 31, 2008
PARTIES: University of Toronto v. S.K.


Hearing Date(s): June 18, 2008

Panel Members:
Mr. Andrew Pinto, Chair
Professor Bruno Magliocchetti, Faculty Panel Member
Ms. Melany Bleue, Student Panel Member

Appearances:
Ms. Lily Harmer, Assistant Discipline Counsel for the University, and Mr. Danny Kasnter
Ms. Lucy Gaspini, Academic Affairs Officer, UTM
Mr. Max Shapiro, Legal Representative for the Student
S.K., the Student, did not attend

Trial Division – s. B.i.3(a) of Code – forged academic records – degree certificate and falsified curriculum vitae – Agreed Statement of Facts – guilty plea – jurisdiction relative to former students – see Appendix A, s. 2(s) of the Code – Joint Submission on Penalty – act required significant deliberation – Joint Submission on Penalty accepted – recommendation that the Student be expelled as per s. C.ii.(b)(i) of Code; five-year suspension pending expulsion decision; and report to Provost

The Student was charged with two offences under s. B.i.3(a), and alternatively, s. B.i.3(b) of the Code. The charges related to allegations that the Student submitted to a potential employer a forged University degree certificate purporting to confer a Bachelor of Science degree, and a falsified curriculum vitae indicating that the Student’s formal education consisted of an Honours Bachelor of Science and an Honours Bachelor of Arts. The Panel was provided with an Agreed Statement of Facts in which the Student admitted to the allegations. The Student did not attend but was represented by counsel. The Panel noted that the Student had not been registered at the University for a number of years and sought clarification on its jurisdiction relative to former students. The Panel found that Appendix A, s. 2(s) of the Code conferred its jurisdiction relative to former students. Based on the Agreed Statement of Facts, the Panel found the Student guilty of the charges under s. B.i.3(a) of the Code. A Joint Submission on Penalty was submitted to the Panel. The Panel considered the consequence of expulsion with respect to the Student’s academic achievements and found that the credits earned by the Student while at the University would not be affected by expulsion. The Panel observed that the forgery of a University document required a significant amount of deliberation and that the Student’s fabricated resume listed two bachelor degrees from the University. The Panel found that the Student made a poor decision in giving in to the factors in his personal life that tempted him to misrepresent his academic achievements. The Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and recommended to the President, further to s. C.ii.(b)(i) of the Code, that the Student be expelled from the University; a suspension of up to five-years pending the expulsion decision; and that a report be issued to the Provost.