DATE: February 7, 2017
PARTIES: University of Toronto v. Y.H. ("the Student")
Hearing Date(s): January 23, 2017
Ms. Roslyn M. Tsao, Chair
Professor Kathi Wilson, Faculty Panel Member (appearing by Skype)
Ms. Sherice Robertson, Student Panel Member
Ms. Tina Lie, Assistant Discipline Counsel for University, Paliare Roland Barristers
Mr. Cormac Donovan, Law Student for the Student, Downtown Legal Services
Y.H., the Student
Ms. Lucy Gaspini, Manager, Academic Integrity & Affairs, Office of the Dean, University of Toronto Mississauga
Mr. Christopher Lang, Director, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances
Trial Division - s. B.i.1(c) and s.B.i.1(a) of Code - personation - falsification - student pretended not to have written test for medical reasons - guilty plea - agreed statement of facts - joint submission on penalty accepted - Tribunal may have imposed a more serious penalty but for the joint submission - zero on course, three year suspension, four year notation, publication of the decision with the name of the Student withheld
The Student was charged with personation and three counts of forgery/falsification under s. B.i.1(c) and s. B.i.1(a) of the Code, and in the alternative with two counts of academic dishonesty under s. B.i.3(b) of the Code. The Student attended a quiz worth 10% of a course grade, but signed it with a false name and student number. On the quiz, they wrote a note falsely claiming that they were not a registered student in the course but were taking the quiz only "to test my knowledge". The Student then submitted a petition for accommodation falsely stating that they had been unable to attend the quiz for medical reasons.
The Student pled guilty to personation and two counts of forgery, and the University withdrew the other charges. An Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Penalty were put before the Tribunal. The Tribunal accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and ordered that the Student receive a mark of zero in the course, a three year suspension, a four year notation, and that the decision be published with the name of the Student withheld. In finding the Student guilty and in imposing the agreed-upon sanctions, the Panel noted the following: the Student cooperated; the Student had a prior offence; the Student’s conduct was designed to gain an academic advantage; the suspension would delay graduation given that the Student had not been registered since 2016; and, absent the guilty plea, the Panel might have imposed a more serious sanction.