Report #312

DATE: December 5, 2006
PARTIES: Mr. R (for the Student) v. UTSC


Hearing Date(s): December 5, 2006

Committee Members:
Assistant Dean Kaye Joachim, Chair
Professor Ellen Hodnett
Professor Michael Marrus
Ms. Estafania Toledo
Dr. John Wedge

Judicial Affairs Officer:
Dr. Anthony Gray

Appearances:

For the student:
Mr. R

For UTSC:
Professor and Associate Dean, Nick Cheng

UTSC – request for continued registration and leave to file late appeal – not initially thought to be worthwhile to file appeal – lack of written notice of 90 day deadline played no part in failure to meet deadline – effective September 1, 2006, the right to appeal to Governing Council should be clearly communicated – University Policy on Academic Appeals within Divisions – section 3.2.1 the Terms of Reference – no reasonable explanation or demonstrated exceptionable circumstances for delay – request for permission to file appeal beyond the 90 day deadline refused – appeal dismissed

Request for continued registration at UTSC and leave to extend the 90 day deadline for appeal. The notice of appeal was submitted approximately 5 months from the date of the decision of the Divisional Appeals Committee. The Student claimed that he delayed for two months in filling the appeal because, at the time he received the Divisional Appeals Committee decision, he did not initially think it was worthwhile and later he changed his mind. The Divisional Appeals Committee decision was not accompanied by written material specifically advising the Student of the deadline to appeal. The Committee found that the Student was aware throughout the process of his right to appeal to Governing Council. The Calendar and UTSC Petitions Guide for Students clearly stated the appeal process and deadlines. Thus, the lack of written material on the 90 day deadline played no part in the Student’s failure to meet the deadline. The Committee noted that effective September 1, 2006, the existence of the right to appeal to Governing Council should be clearly communicated, in writing, to students for whom the appeal was denied, as stated in the University Policy on Academic Appeals within Divisions. The Committee considered section 3.2.1 the Terms of Reference and found that the Student did not offer a reasonable explanation nor demonstrated exceptionable circumstances for the delay in filing the appeal. Request for permission to file the appeal beyond the 90 day deadline was refused. Appeal dismissed.