DATE: August 11, 2010
PARTIES: S.S.A., (the Student) v. UTSC
Hearing Date(s): June 24, 2010
Committee Members:
Professor Andrew Green, Chair
Dr. Joel Kirsh
Dr. Cindy Woodland
Ken Davy
Ryan Campbell
Appearances:
For the Student Appellant:
S.S.A. (the Student)
Camille Labchuk, DLS for the Student
Kristin Marshall, DLS for the Student
For the UTSC:
Professor John Scherk
UTSC – write deferred examinations – initial deferral obtained – additional deferral – medical injury – skateboarding injury – UTSC Medical Certificate – chiropractor – nature of the activity giving rise to injury – anticipated or prevented – inadequacy of medical certificate – all evidence needed provided – UTSC policy on Special Considerations, Petitions and Appeals – appeal allowed
Appeal of a decision to deny the Student permission to extend time to write deferred examinations in two courses. The Student had previous been placed on academic probation and academic suspension. The Student had enrolled in three courses, but obtained a deferral of examinations in two courses due to the death of his grandmother. The Student then petitioned to further defer writing these examinations as a result of an injury sustained skateboarding. The Student obtained a UTSC Student Medical Certificate from a chiropractor. The petition for deferral was denied by the Academic Appeals Board which said that the accident could have been anticipated and prevented. Before the Committee, UTSC did not rely upon its written submissions or on the discussion of the nature of the activity giving rise to the injury relied on in the Academic Appeal Board’s reasons, but instead argued that the Medical Certificate was inadequate. The Student argued that he had provided all the evidence that was required of him and that it was unfair to visit the concerns about the practitioner on the Student. The Committee reviewed UTSC’s policy on Special Considerations, Petitions and Appeals containing UTSC’s requirements relating to examination deferrals. The Committee agreed that the Student had provided all of the evidence that was required. The Committee noted that if UTSC was concerned about the generality of the information provided on the Medical Certificate, it should revise the Certificate and if concerned about a particular practitioner, it should speak with the appropriate regulatory body for that profession. Appeal allowed.