Tadros v Charles Sturt University and 2 Ors [2008] NSWSC 1140

Tadros v Charles Sturt University and 2 Ors [2008] NSWSC 1140

The Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic) denied the plaintiff procedural fairness by imposing the penalty of failure in PHM315 and exclusion for two years without giving her an opportunity to make submissions on penalty, particularly where she had not been advised of the Head of School and Dean's recommendations. The subsequent appeal did not displace that obligation in the circumstances. The Academic Misconduct Appeals Committee also misdirected itself by treating the delay before the plaintiff's admission and the fact that admission followed detection as matters bearing on the seriousness of the academic misconduct. The appropriate relief was limited to declarations that the DVC (Academic)...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law Judicial Review of University Academic Misconduct Decisions / Principal Judgment; Declaratory Relief Proposed and Costs Reserved
Outcome
Declaratory relief indicated; injunction refused; costs and final form of relief reserved.
Legal Topics
['student Academic Misconduct Policy' 'natural Justice' 'procedural Fairness' 'internal University Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'declaratory Relief']
['administrative Law' 'education Law'] ['student Academic Misconduct Policy' 'natural Justice' 'procedural Fairness' 'internal University Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'declaratory Relief']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Administrative Law Judicial Review of University Academic Misconduct Decisions / Principal Judgment; Declaratory Relief Proposed and Costs Reserved

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Student Academic Misconduct Policy required all three matters in cl 5.5.1 to support the most serious penalty before exclusion could be imposed.' "Whether the Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic) denied procedural fairness by imposing a penalty without giving the plaintiff an opportunity to make submissions on penalty and without prior notice of the Head of School and Dean's recommendations." 'Whether the later hearing by the Academic Misconduct Appeals Committee cured any defects in the earlier decision-making process or justified refusal of relief.' "Whether the Academic Misconduct Appeals Committee misdirected itself by treating the plaintiff's delay in admitting misconduct and the circumstances of her admission as bearing on the seriousness of the academic misconduct." 'Whether relief should extend beyond declarations restraining reliance on the decisions.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic) denied the plaintiff procedural fairness by imposing the penalty of failure in PHM315 and exclusion for two years without giving her an opportunity to make submissions on penalty, particularly where she had not been advised of the Head of School and Dean's recommendations. The subsequent appeal did not displace that obligation in the circumstances. The Academic Misconduct Appeals Committee also misdirected itself by treating the delay before the plaintiff's admission and the fact that admission followed detection as matters bearing on the seriousness of the academic misconduct. The appropriate relief was limited to declarations that the DVC (Academic)...

Court Disposition

Declaratory relief indicated; injunction refused; costs and final form of relief reserved.

Orders

  • ['Declare that the decision of Charles Sturt University via the Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic made on or about 12 November 2007, whereby the penalty imposed was that the plaintiff be failed in the subject PHM 315 and be excluded from the University for a period of 2 years from that date, is void.' 'Declare that...