˽ÈËÓ°Ôº

If you disagree with the findings of your case or sanctions imposed, you may appeal go through the appeal process. Sanctions agreed upon as part of a Collaborative Sanctioning Meeting (CSM) may not be appealed. In the event that a student feels that a sanction they agreed to as part of this process is no longer fair, they may request that a second meeting be scheduled to review the agreement.

Decisions or sanctions imposed under the Non-Academic Judicial Student Code of Conduct may be appealed by the respondent in writing within 15 working days of the decision being communicated to the respondent.

Appeals must be directed to the following appeal adjudicators:

1. The Director, Residence and Student Life for sanctions imposed by an employee within the Student Services unit;
   
   
2. The Executive Director, Student Services for sanctions imposed by Director, Residence and Student Life;
   
   
3. The Vice-Provost, Students, Recruitment, and Enrolment Management for sanctions imposed by the Executive Director, Student Services; or
   
   
4. The Provost and Vice-President, Academic for suspensions or dismissals imposed by the Vice-Provost, Students, Recruitment, and Enrolment Management.

Appeal submissions should include the following:

• The ground(s) you are appealing on (see below).
• Your explanation/reason(s) for appealing. Your explanation should be centered around your grounds for appealing.
• Your explanation should also include your requested resolution. What outcome are you hoping for?
• You have attached any supplementary documentation/information including a copy of your decision letter.

Appeals of decisions made under the Non-Academic Judicial Student Code of Conduct can be made on the following grounds:

1. New information or evidence has come to light that was previously unavailable and may result in a change to the outcome of the case
   
   
2. The case was prejudiced by demonstrated bias or conflict of interest on the part of the person responsible for the decision;
   
   
3. Procedures were not properly followed in a manner significant enough that the outcome may have been influenced; and/or
   
   
4. The sanction(s) imposed is disproportionate to the severity of the violation.