Case #592

DATE: November 10, 2010
PARTIES: University of Toronto v. Y.O.


Hearing Date(s): July 22, 2010

Panel Members:
Mr. Ronald Slaght, Chair
Prof. Gabriele D’Eleuterio, Faculty Member
Ms. Denise Cooney, Student Member


Appearances:
Mr. Robert Centa, Assistant Discipline Counsel for the University
Ms. Betty-Anne Campbell, Paliare Roland Barristers


In Attendance:
Prof. John Browne, Dean's Designate
Mr. Christopher Lang, Director, Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances


Trial Division – s. B.i.1.(d) of Code – plagiarism – paper plagiarized from the course instructor's very own paper – hearing not attended – reasonable notice provided – Panel would have allowed an adjournment had the Student appeared - finding of guilt based on evidence – the usual sanction for commission of a first offence of plagiarism is a two-year suspension – no evidence of mitigation or character; no explanation from Student – grade assignment of zero for Course; two-year suspension; two-year notation on transcript; report to Provost

Student charged under s. B.i.1(d) of the Code. The charges related to the allegations that the Student submitted a paper plagiarized from the course instructor's very own paper. The Student did not attend the hearing. The Panel stated that a combination of factors in this case allowed it to conclude that reasonable notice has been provided: the e-mails sent to the Student, the signature of receipt of the courier package sent to the Student, and the registration and deregistration in summer courses by the Student. The Panel also stated that had the Student appeared before the Panel and said that one month's notice was not enough, the Panel would have allowed an adjournment. The Panel found the Student guilty under s.B.i.1(d). The Panel acknowledged that it was established that the usual sanction for commission of a first offence of plagiarism was a two-year suspension. In this case, there was no evidence of mitigation or character and no explanation from the Student that might allow the Panel to deviate from the usual sanction. Thus, the Panel imposed a grade assignment of zero in the course, a two-year suspension; a two-year notation on the Student’s transcript; and a report be issued to the Provost.