De-coding Appeal grounds

To appeal a decision to the Student Appeals Committee, you must be able to demonstrate one or more of the following grounds from the Students Regulation:

1. that there was relevant evidence which—  
   (i) was not taken into account by the decision-maker; and (ii) was not known by the applicant before the decision and could not reasonably have been known;
2. that the decision was manifestly wrong;
3. that a procedural irregularity occurred which may have affected the decision;
4. that the penalty imposed was manifestly excessive;
5. that there was a deemed refusal.

You may be asking, what do the Grounds for an appeal actually mean, and can I have an example? Of course!

That there was relevant evidence which—
(i) was not taken into account by the decision-maker; and
(ii) was not known by the applicant before the decision and could not reasonably have been known;

Meaning:

You have new evidence supporting your initial application or appeal which you did not provide and which you could not have known about or provided at the time of your application or appeal. The bit in bold is really important – this is not just about providing additional evidence that you forgot to include. The other important thing to note is that this extra evidence must be likely to impact the decision – minor or irrelevant information doesn’t count, and you need to explain why the evidence is important in your appeal.

Example:

You were excluded from your course for two years following two consecutive failing semesters. You appealed to the Executive Dean of the Institute, based on the fact that you had faced some personal challenges leaving you unable to concentrate or study properly, and unable to manage your time adequately. You have put in place lots of support to enable you to succeed in future if allowed to continue, but the appeal was denied.

Whilst you were waiting for an outcome, you had several appointments with your GP and specialists, and you were diagnosed with an ongoing disability which (in their medical opinion) may have caused or significantly contributed to your recent struggles. With medication and ongoing support and reasonable adjustments negotiated via the Disability and Learning Access Unit, your medical team are confident that these study challenges will be overcome.

Providing letters from your medical team explaining the impacts of your condition, the interventions you will have in future and the expected positive impact of them constitutes new, relevant evidence which hopefully allows the decision to be overturned and you receive a second chance.

That the decision was manifestly wrong;

Meaning:

Manifestly wrong is not just whether you disagree with the decision – it’s about was the decision objectively wrong according to the policy/procedure under which it was made. This could include things like a penalty which was unavailable to the decision-maker, or a decision made which is illogical or made as a result of perceived bias.

Example:

You sat an exam using Respondus Monitor and LockDown browser. During the exam, the LockDown browser crashed and, following the University’s guidelines took a photo of the screen for evidence and contacted your Unit Coordinator. The Unit Coordinator instructed you to apply for Special Consideration, which you did. Special Consideration was denied by your Course Coordinator because you had not provided sufficient evidence that your computer crashed during the exam.

This decision could be deemed “manifestly wrong” because:

- you followed the instructions and provided evidence according to the university’s own guidelines

- it was not your computer which crashed (which could be argued puts responsibility with you – although we disagree), but the LockDown Browser provided by Respondus and the University over which you have no control

-  the decision-making is illogical – you were told by your Unit Coordinator to apply for Special Consideration and there was no other process available to you to resolve the issue. When you did so, it was denied.

- it was also arguably unreasonable for you to provide any additional evidence of the browser crashing than a photo clearly showing that it had

That a procedural irregularity occurred which may have affected the decision

Meaning:

That the decision-makers haven’t followed the correct process according to University policy and that this has caused a different outcome than would otherwise have been given. You need to be able to identify the policy/procedure that has not been followed, explain the way it has not been followed (with evidence) and explain how this has likely led to an unfair decision. This could include being denied natural justice in some way as the right to this in University decision-making is enshrined in the “Fair and Transparent Decision-making Guidelines”

Example:

You attended an Academic Misconduct hearing at which the Academic Integrity Officer referred to evidence that had not been provided to you beforehand. This contradicts both the Academic Misconduct Procedure and the Students Regulation, and meant that you were unable to adequately prepare for the hearing and defend yourself against the allegation.

That the penalty imposed was manifestly excessive

Meaning:

Again, this isn’t just about whether you think the penalty was excessive – it’s whether:

- it has an unduly severe impact on you as an individual, over and above the impact the same decision would have on another student; and/or

- it is more severe than allowed by the relevant policy/procedure for the offence

Example:

You are a Nursing student who is due to complete their course this semester. You have received an Academic Misconduct notification (1^st offence, low severity) for one of your final subjects, having successfully completed everything else. After the hearing, the penalty you are given is zero for the assessment. Because the assessment is worth 50% of the final grade, this means you fail the subject and can’t re-take it until the same semester the following year – your completion date is delayed by 1 year. Because you had a grad role in place on the basis that you would complete this semester, this will need to be cancelled and your Registration and career delayed.

The penalty of failure of the assessment is available for this offence. However, because of the assessment and course structure (over which you have no control), this has an excessive impact on you because it:

- is a de facto failure of the whole subject which is not available for a 1^st, low severity breach

- puts an unnecessary financial, personal, academic and professional burden on you to wait another year to complete.

That there was a deemed refusal.

This is the easy (or at least clear-cut) one, so no need for an example!

Meaning:

That 30 days or more have passed since you applied for a decision, and you have not yet been notified of the outcome. This is considered a “refusal” or rejection of your appeal/application.

Please note that this does not prevent the University making the decision and providing an outcome whilst you go through the appeal process. In this instance, the likely outcome from your appeal is simply that the decision-maker gets told to make a decision.