Academic Regulations

RULE 1: ACADEMIC REGULATIONS AND ATTENDANCE

1.1 Conditions of Admission and Attendance

Candidates are admitted subject to, and during attendance are bound by, all academic, disciplinary and other regulations of the University and the Common Law Section, as well as any amendments thereto.

1.2 Attendance

Full-time attendance is required during the 30 teaching weeks of each academic year, during which registration in other academic or professional programs is prohibited. Irregular attendance, employment in excess of 20 hours per week, or lack of effort may result in compulsory withdrawal.

1.3 Interruption of Studies

Students who interrupt their studies for less than 24 consecutive months, with the permission of the Assistant Dean, may pursue their program with no additional requirement, by completing the relevant registration form available from the Academic Affairs Office.

1.4 Re-admission after Prolonged Interruption of Studies

Students wishing to return after a voluntary withdrawal of 24 consecutive months or more from the Section or the University must present a new application for admission and are subject to the admission requirements in force at that time.

RULE 2: Methods of Evaluation

2.1 Statement of Policy

The chief purpose of student evaluation in a course is to form a fair and accurate assessment of each student's mastery of the course.

The method of evaluation chosen should reflect the range of materials covered and the skills taught in the course accurately and comprehensively.

In so far as possible evaluation methods should also have a pedagogic value for the students.

2.2 Choice of Method

The method of evaluation for a course is determined by the instructor, subject to the following.

All full year courses in first year must provide some form of mid-term evaluation for which students receive feedback. This evaluation must take place prior to or during the December examination period. Feedback may take any appropriate form including comments on student papers, sample or model answers, review sessions or personal interviews.
Where students are to be evaluated in whole or in part on the basis of their oral performance or participation in class, the instructor must keep a written record of or written commentary on each student's performance or participation sufficient to justify the grade assigned.
Where students are to be evaluated in whole or in part on the basis of a joint presentation or assignment, if feasible the instructor should give students who object to joint evaluation the option of working alone.

2.3 Disclosure of Method of Evaluation

Instructors must forward a description of the method of evaluation to be used in their upper year courses to the Academic Administrator in sufficient time for inclusion in the registration materials sent to students in the spring. Where a method of evaluation to be used is an examination, the description of this method shall specify the format and value of the examination. The deadline for submitting this material will be fixed by the Academic Administrator.
At the beginning of each upper year course, before the end of the course change period, instructors must confirm to students in writing the method of evaluation that will be used in the course. Where a method of evaluation to be used is an examination, instructors must also confirm the format and value of the examination.
In each first year course, the instructor must confirm to students in writing the method of evaluation that will be used in the course before the end of the first regularly scheduled class in the course. Where a method of evaluation to be used is an examination, the instructor must also confirm the format and value of the examination.
For purposes of this subsection and subsection 2.4, “format” means the duration of an examination, the open-book vs. closed-book nature of an examination, and whether an examination is a take-home examination

2.4 Changes to a Method of Evaluation

After the distribution of upper year registration materials to students, the method of evaluation set out in the materials, including the format and value of any examinations, should not be changed without good reason.
In upper year courses, the instructor may not change the method of evaluation, including the format and value of any examinations, after the course change period if any student registered in the course objects to the proposed change.
In first year courses, once the method of evaluation has been confirmed in the first regularly scheduled class, the instructor may not change the method of evaluation, including the format and value of any examinations, if any student registered in the course objects to the proposed change.

RULE 3: TAKING COURSES IN OTHER FACULTIES

3.1 General Rules

In fulfilling the requirements of their law school program, students may take courses offered by the English or the French programs of the Common Law Section or by the Civil Law Section. Students who wish to take courses in Faculties other than the Faculty of Law must obtain prior permission to do so from the Assistant Dean.
Students who take courses in Faculties other than the Faculty of Law are subject to the rules of the Faculty in which the courses are taken in matters relating to the courses, including entitlement to special and supplemental examinations.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, National Program students are not permitted to take courses offered by the Civil Law Section in order to satisfy the 30 credits required by the Common Law Section to satisfy LL.B. degree requirements.

3.2 Exception for Civil Law Courses

Students who take courses in the Civil Law Section are subject to the rules of the Civil Law Section in matters relating to the courses, except for entitlement to special examinations and supplemental evaluation. The rules of the Common Law Section govern the entitlement of Common Law students to special examinations and supplemental evaluation.

3.3 Exception for January Term

Notwithstanding the foregoing, students are only permitted to take courses offered by the Common Law Section in satisfaction of January Term course requirements.

RulE 4: Examinations

4.1 Administration by Academic Affairs Office

All examinations scheduled during official examination periods, including take-home examinations, must be administered through the Academic Affairs Office.
For examinations scheduled during official examination periods, all instructors must submit their examination questionnaires to the Academic Affairs Office not later than five working days prior to the scheduled date for the examination.

4.2 Scheduling Examinations

Mid-year examinations for full year courses, including take-home examinations, should normally be scheduled during the official December examination period.
No examinations may be scheduled during the final two weeks of classes in a term.
To the extent possible, all advance, deferred, special and supplemental examinations in a given course shall be scheduled at the same time and in the same place.

4.3 Reusing Old Examinations

In light of the potential problems arising from repeating previously used examination questions, instructors are discouraged from doing so.

4.4 Length and Format of Examinations

The following rules apply to both mid-term and final examinations, excluding take-home examinations.

In drafting examination instructions, instructors should follow the format prepared by the Academic Affairs Office.
Examinations that are scheduled during the official examination period must be set for either two hours or three hours inclusive of any reading time.
Mandatory reading periods, during which students are not permitted to write or are denied access to their examination booklets, should be avoided.

4.4bis Length of Take-Home Examinations

Except where special permission has been granted by the Vice-Dean of the relevant program, take-home examinations should not exceed 6 hours’ duration and should be scheduled to begin and end on the same day.

4.5 Co-Examiners

Instructors must arrange for a co-examiner to review each examination given in the course. The co-examiner may be a full or part time member of faculty or some other suitable person. Where an instructor is unable to arrange for a co-examiner, the Academic Administrator will do so on his or her behalf.
In reviewing an examination, the co-examiner should consider, in so far as possible,
- the clarity of the instructions and the accuracy of any arithmetic,
- the intelligibility and consistency of the problems or questions,
- whether the length of the examination and the examination techniques used are appropriate;
- the suitability to the understanding and knowledge of the students in the course.

4.6 Examination Timetable Conflicts

In selecting courses, students are responsible for ensuring that no examination timetable conflicts are created. Where a conflict is created, the student is not entitled to have one of the examinations rescheduled. This rule applies equally to regular and take-home examinations.
Although not encouraged, students may select courses with concurrent or overlapping take-home examinations. Similarly, students may select courses where a take-home examination overlaps with a regular examination. A student who does so voluntarily abridges the time that will be available to him or her to prepare for and complete the concurrent or overlapping examinations, and is not entitled to have any of the examinations rescheduled or extended.
In selecting courses, students are responsible for creating an examination timetable that accommodates their study and travel needs. Where the relevant timetable information has been made available to the student in advance, requests to reschedule examinations will not be allowed except in accordance with the grounds and procedures provided for in Rules 6 and 7.

4.7 Attendance at Examinations

Although practice examinations are not compulsory, students are urged to take them and prepare for them seriously.

The instructor shall determine whether a fail-safe examination is or is not compulsory.

When disclosing the method of evaluation for the course pursuant to Rule 2.3, the instructor shall disclose to students and the Academic Administrator whether a fail-safe examination is or is not compulsory and, if compulsory, any penalties for non-attendance at the examination. Thereafter, the instructor may not change the compulsory or non-compulsory nature of a fail-safe examination or any penalties for non-attendance at the examination if any student registered in the course objects to the proposed change.

RULE 5: INVIGILATION OF EXAMINATIONS

5.1 Invigilators

All instructors, including part-time instructors, are obliged to invigilate their exams; instructors must be present in the examination room and not merely available in or near the building. Part-time instructors who cannot fulfill this obligation must notify the Academic Administrator as soon as possible so that a substitute can be found.
Where required, the Academic Administrator shall designate additional invigilators.

5.2 Invigilation Rules

Invigilators must apply the following rules.

No student may be admitted to the examination room before the time announced for admission of all students to the room.
If the examination is closed book, students are not permitted to bring books, notes or other materials into the examination room, subject to the exception concerning dictionaries.
Students are entitled to bring French, English or French-English language dictionaries into the examination room for use during an examination regardless of the type of examination.
If the examination is partially open book, each student must be checked to ensure compliance with the description of permissible materials set out in the examination. After the students are seated and before the examination begins, the instructor and invigilators must examine the materials brought in for examination use by each student and must remove any materials which do not meet the description.
Students must present their student identification card to the invigilator. Each booklet must be identified using only the student number. The student’s name must not be written in or on any examination booklet.
Before the examination begins, the invigilators must circulate the class list for student signature. Students whose names do not appear on the list should add their names at the end.
Before the examination begins the invigilators must announce the time at which the examination will begin and end and must remind students of their obligation to close their examination booklets immediately upon being told to do so.
During the examination only one student at a time may leave the room. A student who has temporarily left the examination room may not consult materials outside the room or discuss the examination with another person.
If in the opinion of the invigilators an examination has been substantially disrupted (by a fire alarm, for example, or persistent noise of construction), the invigilators in consultation with the Academic Administrator may extend the examination period for whatever length of time they think appropriate.
An examination period may not be extended in response to representations or perceptions that the examination is unduly long or difficult.
The invigilators must announce the final thirty and the final fifteen minute periods of the examination and students must be advised that they cannot leave the room during this period but must remain seated until the end of the examination.
The invigilators must announce the end of the examination and instruct students to close their examination booklets, put down their pens and remain seated until the invigilator gives students permission to leave the room.
Students may not continue to write in their examination booklets after the instruction to close. The invigilators must record the student number of any student who ignores this rule and inform the student that his or her student number has been recorded. The penalty for continuing to write after the instruction to close is to subtract 10% of the value of the examination from the student's grade. If an examination is worth 60% of the final grade in the course, for example, six points would be subtracted from the student's grade.
At the end of the examination, if a student has not written his or her student number or any other information required on an examination booklet cover, he or she must only record the missing information under the supervision of an invigilator.
After announcing the end of the examination the invigilators must pick up all booklets (used and unused) and all questionnaires. The number of sets of used booklets must be counted and tested against the number of students who signed the attendance sheet. Students may leave only after all used booklets are accounted for.
It is each student’s responsibility to ensure that all examination booklets are handed in at the end of the examination. A student who fails to hand in any or all booklets before leaving the examination room will not be permitted to do so subsequently.
The invigilators must not write anything in or on a used examination booklet.

RULE 6: ADVANCE SCHEDULING OF EXAMINATIONS

6.1 Grounds for Advance Scheduling

A student may apply to have an examination moved forward on one or more of the following grounds:
1. illness or other medical condition;
2. religious belief;
3. death in the immediate family;
4. other compassionate grounds.
Advance scheduling is available due to necessity caused by extraordinary circumstances only, as provided in paragraph 6.1(a), and will not be granted to accommodate travel plans or rental arrangements or to improve a student's examination schedule.
The onus is on the student to prove that grounds exist that justify the remedy sought.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, students are not entitled to apply for advance scheduling of a January term examination.

6.2 Procedure for Requesting Advance Scheduling

In the absence of compelling excuse, a student who seeks to have an examination moved forward must comply with the following requirements.

The student must prepare an application in writing addressed to the Assistant Dean which sets out the remedy sought and the grounds for the remedy. Where possible, this application should be submitted four weeks prior to the beginning of the examination period.
Students requesting a remedy on medical grounds must submit with their application a medical certificate signed by a physician which sets out in sufficient detail the medical condition affecting the student, the date of the medical examination and the date of the certificate.
Students requesting a remedy on other grounds must submit appropriate supporting documentation with their application.

Applications will be referred to the Assistant Dean who will determine whether the student has established grounds for a remedy.

The Assistant Dean may refer any application to the Examinations Committee for decision.

6.3 Scheduling of Advance Examinations

A student who is granted advance scheduling of an examination shall be required to write the examination at a time and place to be determined by the Assistant Dean in consultation with the Academic Administrator.
In determining the timing of the advance examination, the Assistant Dean shall have regard to the grounds justifying the advance scheduling of the examination, and shall consult with the instructor.
To the extent possible, all students granted advance scheduling of an examination in a given course shall be required to write the examination at the same time and in the same place.
Exceptions to paragraph 6.3(c) may be made by the Assistant Dean on the basis of one or more of the grounds enumerated in paragraph 6.1(a). The onus is on the student to prove that grounds exist that justify any such exception.

6.4 Appeals

A student who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Assistant Dean may appeal to the Examinations Committee.

A student who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Examinations Committee may appeal to the Senate Committee for the Study of Individual Cases.

6.5 Value and Format of Advance Examinations

Advance examinations shall be of the same value and format as the regular examination in the course. For purposes of this rule, “format” means the duration of an examination, the open-book vs. closed-book nature of an examination, and whether an examination is a take-home examination.

RULE 7: DEFERRAL OF EXAMINATIONS

7.1 No Penalty for Attempting Examination

Students are encouraged to write their examinations at the regularly scheduled time whenever possible, even if there are grounds for deferral of the examination.
Where a student has grounds for a deferral but chooses to write at the regularly scheduled time, if the results of the examination are unsatisfactory to the student, he or she is entitled to write a special examination at a subsequent time pursuant to Rule 8.

7.2 Grounds for Deferral of Examination

A student may apply for deferral of an examination on one or more of the following grounds:
1. illness or other medical condition;
2. religious belief;
3. death in the immediate family;
4. other compassionate grounds.
The onus is on the student to prove that grounds exist that justify the remedy sought.
Students who intend to request a deferral because of illness or other medical condition must consult a physician and obtain a medical certificate (described below), and where possible, do so within twenty-four hours of the examination to be deferred.

Students may find it convenient to consult one of the physicians at the University Health Service currently located at 100 Marie-Curie, 3rd Floor. The telephone number is 564-3950.

7.3 Procedure for Requesting Deferral of Examination

In the absence of compelling excuse, a student who seeks a deferral must comply with the following requirements.

Where possible, the student should notify the Academic Affairs Office of his or her intention to apply for a deferral before or on the day of the examination to be deferred.
The student must submit an application in writing addressed to the Assistant Dean which sets out the remedy sought and the grounds for the remedy. This application must be submitted within five working days of the end of the examination period.
Students requesting a deferral because of illness or other medical condition must submit with their application a medical certificate signed by a physician which sets out in sufficient detail the medical condition affecting the student, the date of the medical examination and the date the certificate was issued.
Students requesting a deferral on other grounds must submit appropriate supporting documentation with their application.
Applications will be referred to the Assistant Dean who will determine whether the student has established grounds for a remedy.
The Assistant Dean may refer any application to the Examinations Committee for decision.

7.4 Scheduling of Deferred Examination

A student who is granted a deferral will be required to write a special examination at a time and place to be determined by the Assistant Dean in consultation with the Academic Administrator.
In the case of deferral of a December examination, the special examination shall be written during the Winter study week.
In the case of deferral of a January or April examination for a non-graduating student, the special examination shall be written between mid-June and mid-July.
In the case of deferral of a January or April examination for a graduating student, the special examination shall be written in late May.
All students granted deferral of an examination in a given course in each of the categories referred to in paragraphs 7.4(b), (c) and (d) shall be required to write the special examination at the same time and in the same place.
Exceptions to paragraphs 7.4(b), (c), (d) and (e) may be made by the Assistant Dean on the basis of one or more of the grounds enumerated in paragraph 7.2(a). The onus is on the student to establish that grounds exist to justify any such exception.

7.5 Appeals

A student who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Assistant Dean may appeal to the Examinations Committee.

A student who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Examinations Committee may appeal to the Senate Committee for the Study of Individual Cases.

7.6 Value and Format of Deferred Examinations

Deferred examinations shall be of the same value and format as the regular examination in the course. For purposes of this rule, “format” means the duration of an examination, the open-book vs. closed-book nature of an examination, and whether an examination is a take-home examination.

RULE 8: REWRITING EXAMINATIONS

8.1 Grounds for Rewriting an Examination

Where a student has grounds for deferral of an examination pursuant to paragraph 7.2(a) but chooses to write the examination at the regularly scheduled time, if the results of the examination are unsatisfactory to the student, he or she is entitled to write a special examination at a subsequent time.
Where a student falls ill during an examination, if the results of the examination are unsatisfactory to the student, he or she is entitled to write a special examination at a subsequent time.
The onus is on the student to prove that grounds exist that justify the remedy sought.
Students who intend to rely on illness or other medical condition must consult a physician and obtain a medical certificate (described below), and where possible, do so before or within twenty-four hours of the examination which the student may wish to rewrite.

Students may find it convenient to consult one of the physicians at the University Health Services currently located at 100 Marie-Curie, 3rd Floor. The telephone number is 564-3950.

8.2 Procedure for Requesting a Rewrite

In the absence of a compelling excuse, a student who seeks to rewrite an examination must comply with the following requirements.

The student must notify the Assistant Dean, on or before the day of the examination to be rewritten, that he or she may wish to apply for permission to rewrite an examination.
The student must prepare a notice in writing addressed to the Assistant Dean stating that he or she may wish to apply for permission to rewrite an examination and the grounds for the remedy. This notice must be submitted within five working days of the end of the examination period.
After examination results are published, a student who has complied with the requirements of Rule 8.2(a) and (b) and has been given permission to rewrite an examination must advise the Assistant Dean in writing of his or her intention to rewrite by the following deadlines:

Fall term:                     Last day of classes in January term
January term:               March 1
Winter term:                June 1
Students whose application is based on illness or other medical condition must submit with their application a medical certificate signed by a physician which sets out in sufficient detail the medical condition affecting the student, the date of the medical examination and the date the certificate was issued.
Students whose application is based on other grounds must submit appropriate supporting documentation with their application.

Applications will be referred to the Assistant Dean who will determine whether the student has established grounds for a remedy.

The Assistant Dean may refer any application to the Examinations Committee for decision.

8.3 Scheduling of Special Examination

A student who is permitted to rewrite an examination will be required to write a special examination at a time and place to be determined by the Assistant Dean in consultation with the Academic Administrator.
In the case of a December examination, the special examination shall be written during the Winter study week.
In the case of a January, April or May examination for a non-graduating student, the special examination shall be written between mid-June and mid-July.
In the case of a January, April or May examination for a graduating student, the special examination shall be written in late May.
All students permitted to write a special examination in a given course in each of the categories referred to in paragraphs 8.3 (b), (c) and (d) shall be required to write the special examination at the same time and in the same place.
Exceptions to paragraphs 8.3 (b), (c), (d) and (e) may be made by the Assistant Dean on the basis of one or more of the grounds enumerated in paragraph 7.2(a). The onus is on the student to prove that grounds exist that justify any such exception.
The grade obtained on the special examination replaces the grade obtained on the original examination written by the student.

8.4 Appeals

A student who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Assistant Dean may appeal to the Examinations Committee.

A student who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Examinations Committee may appeal to the Senate Committee for the Study of Individual Cases.

8.5 Value and Format of Special Examinations

Special examinations shall be of the same value and format as the regular examination in the course. For purposes of this rule, “format” means the duration of an examination, the open-book vs. closed-book nature of an examination, and whether an examination is a take-home examination.

RULE 9: WRITTEN ASSIGNMENTS

9.1 Double Submission

Students may not submit the same or substantially the same written assignment for more than one course.

9.2 Submission of Papers

Whenever possible, written assignments are to be submitted by students in class, directly to the instructor. Where an instructor cannot receive papers in class, timely notice must be given to the Academic Administrator so that a suitable submission procedure can be arranged.

9.3 Fixing and Disclosure of Deadlines

The date for the submission of written assignments is fixed by the instructor, subject to the following.

All assignments must be due no later than the final day of the official examination period for the term, except in the cases of CML 4200 “Selected Topics for January Term and Winter Part II Term” and CML 4600 “Problèmes choisis pour les sessions de janvier et hiver partie II”, in which cases all assignments must be due no later than the final day of the official examination period for the Winter term.
In upper year courses, where a written assignment is worth 30% or more of the final grade, the instructor must disclose the deadline for submission of the assignment before the end of the course change period. Thereafter, the instructor may not change the deadline for submission of the assignment if any student registered in the course objects to the proposed change.
In first year courses, where a written assignment is worth 30% or more of the final grade, the instructor must disclose the deadline for submission of the assignment before the end of the first regularly scheduled class in each term. Thereafter, the instructor may not change the deadline for submission of the assignment if any student registered in the course objects to the proposed change.
Instructors must not grant extensions of submission deadlines. Requests for an extension of a deadline must be directed to the Assistant Dean as set out below in Rule 13.

9.4 Penalty for Late Submission

A written assignment is liable to be penalized if it is submitted after the deadline for submission (or, where an extension has been granted by the Assistant Dean, after the extended deadline).
In upper year courses, instructors must formulate a policy on penalties for late submission and must announce this policy to students before the end of the course change period. Thereafter, the instructor may not change the policy if any student registered in the course objects to the proposed change.
In first year courses, instructors must formulate a policy on penalties for late submission and must announce this policy to students before the end of the first regularly scheduled class in the course. Thereafter, the instructor may not change the policy if any student registered in the course objects to the proposed change.
In cases where instructors fail to formulate a policy on penalties for late submission as required under paragraphs (b) and (c) above, a penalty of 10% of the value of the assignment shall apply for every day or part thereof by which the assignment is late.

RULE 10: MAJOR PAPER REQUIREMENT

10.1 Definition of Major Paper

A major paper must be completed in the context of a course worth at least three credits and should:
1. present an original thesis, reform proposal or critique regarding a particular legal issue or area of law so as to provide a reader familiar with the issues with valuable knowledge or insights; or
2. synthesize the existing literature (cases, legislation and commentary) relating to a particular area of law in order to either clarify a difficult area, speculate as to the application to new issues, or evaluate the existing law.
The presentation should be clear and finished.
The paper should comprise 5,000 to 10,000 words (approximately 20 to 40 typed, double-spaced pages, excluding footnotes and bibliography). An instructor may authorize an exception to the length of a paper when its originality and importance warrant it.
A major paper should count for not less than 50% of the grade assigned in the course for which the paper is written.

10.2 Passing Grade

To satisfy the major paper requirement, the student must receive a passing grade on the major paper itself. It is not sufficient to pass the course for which the major paper is written.

RULE 11: DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECTS

11.1 Definition

A Directed Research Project may be undertaken by any student who wishes to further enhance his or her knowledge of a specific area of the. A Directed Research Project can take the form of either a directed research paper or another type of research project.

11.2 Registration

In order to register for a Directed Research Project, a student must file, with the Academic Affairs Office, a completed Directed Research Project Registration Form, including a description of the research project, as approved by the project Supervisor.
In the case where the project Supervisor is not a regular full-time professor, the project will be presented to the Assistant Dean for approval.

11.3 Guidelines for Directed Research Projects

A Directed Research Project may qualify for two, three or four credits. Where the project is a research paper, the recommended lengths for such papers, excluding footnotes and bibliography, are as follows:

2 credits: 5000 to 7500 words (approximately 20 to 30 typed, double-spaced pages)

3 credits: 7500 to 10000 words (approximately 30 to 40 typed, double-spaced pages)

4 credits: 10000 to 12500 words (approximately 40 to 50 typed, double-spaced pages)

Lorsque le projet de recherche est d’un autre genre, le travail que l’étudiant doit consacrer à ce projet devrait être comparable en quantité à ce qu’exige la préparation d’un travail de recherche selon les critères précités

11.4 Grading

Grading for Directed Research Projects will be by letter grade unless otherwise approved by the Assistant Dean.

RULE 12: STUDENT-PROPOSED INTERNSHIPS

12.1 Definition

An internship can be proposed by any student who wishes to further enhance his or her knowledge of a specific area of law while gaining workplace-related skills.

12.2 Registration

In order to register for an internship, a student must file, with the Academic Affairs Office, a completed Internship Registration Form, including a description of the project or duties which will be assigned to the student within the organization he or she will be joining.

The internship proposal must be submitted to the Assistant Dean for approval. Approval will only be granted where the Assistant Dean is satisfied that the internship is pedagogically worthwhile for the student and that the organization or individual supervising the student understands its obligations to provide the student with legal work experiences which will enhance the student’s knowledge of a specific area of the law. In order to ensure the pedagogical value of the internship, the student must submit regular reports to the Assistant Dean. These reports must be signed by the internship supervisor.

12.3 Guidelines for Student-Proposed Internships

An internship will qualify for three credits if the student spends the equivalent of at least 13 working days with the organization.

12.4 Grading

Grading for student-proposed internships will be on a Satisfactory/Non-Satisfactory basis.

RULE 13: EXTENSION OF DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTING WRITTEN ASSIGNMENTS

13.1 Grounds for Extension of Deadline

A student may apply for an extension of the deadline for submission of a written assignment on any of the following grounds:
- illness or other medical condition;
- religious belief;
- death in the immediate family;
- other compassionate grounds.
The onus is on the student to prove that grounds exist that justify the remedy sought.
Students who intend to request an extension because of illness or other medical condition must consult a physician and obtain a medical certificate (see 13.2 b) below), where possible, immediately prior to or within twenty-four hours of the deadline to be extended.

Students may find it convenient to consult one of the physicians at the University Health Services currently located at 100 Marie-Curie, 3rd Floor. The telephone number is 564-3950.

13.2 Procedure for Requesting Extension

In the absence of compelling excuse, a student who seeks an extension must comply with the following requirements.

The student must submit an application in writing, addressed to the Assistant Dean which sets out the remedy sought and the grounds for the remedy. This application must be submitted before or on the day of the deadline to be extended.
Students requesting an extension because of illness or other medical excuse must submit with their application a medical certificate signed by a physician which sets out in sufficient detail the medical condition affecting student, the date of the medical examination and the date the certificate was issued.
Students requesting an extension on other grounds must submit appropriate supporting documentation with their application.

Applications will be referred to the Assistant Dean who will determine whether the student has established grounds for a remedy.

The Assistant Dean may refer any application to the Examinations Committee for decision.

13.3 Appeals

A student who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Assistant Dean may appeal to the Examinations Committee.

A student who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Examinations Committee may appeal to the Senate Committee for the Study of Individual Cases.

RULE 14: PROLONGED DEFERRALS AND EXTENSIONS

14.1 Deadline for Completion

All deferred examinations or papers must be completed within 12 months of the original date set for the evaluation.
A course for which the evaluation is, for valid reasons, not completed by the student at the end of this time period will be graded as INC (incomplete) in the student’s academic record. This grade, the numerical equivalent of a failure, will remain on a student’s transcript, but it will be listed as “extra-curricular” and will not, therefore, affect the student’s grade point average in the LL.B. program. The course will either have to be repeated or replaced with other credits.
A student wishing to obtain an extension beyond the 12 month limit must apply in writing to the Examinations Committee prior to the expiry of this period and provide detailed grounds for the request.

14.2 Restrictions on Further Registration

A student with more than one deferred examination or paper at the beginning of an academic year will not be permitted to register in any additional course until all deferred examinations and papers are complete and grades have been entered.

RULE 15: REVIEW OF GRADES

15.1 Mechanical Error

Where an arithmetical, transcription or other mechanical error is discovered, the student should bring the error to the attention of the instructor.
If the error affects the student's grade, the instructor must immediately forward the corrected examination or assignment to the Academic Administrator along with an explanation of the error.
If satisfied that the error is mechanical in nature, the Academic Administrator shall correct the student’s grade. In case of doubt, the Academic Administrator shall consult with the Chair of the Examinations Committee before determining whether the error is mechanical in nature.
Where it is determined that the error is not mechanical in nature, the student may nevertheless apply for review of his or her grade in accordance with the procedure described below.

15.2 Review of Grades

Students may not apply for review of a grade unless, in so far as possible, a serious attempt has been made by the student to obtain an explanation of the grade from the instructor.
Instructors must provide a reasonable explanation for any grade given to a student. A reasonable explanation may take a variety of forms, including, without limitation:
- written commentary on the student’s work
- oral feedback at the time of a student presentation or exercise
- distribution of a model or sample answer or work
- distribution of a marking key or guide
- subsequent review of an examination or assignment in class
- correspondence with a student setting out an explanation for the student’s grade
- meeting with a student to provide an explanation for the student’s grade.
Even where other forms of explanation have been provided, instructors are encouraged to make themselves reasonably available to meet with students in order to answer students’ questions and provide further reasonable explanation for the grade assigned.
Students must not attempt to negotiate a change in their grade with their instructor. Instructors have no jurisdiction to change a grade once it has been submitted to and approved by Faculty Council.
After obtaining an explanation of the grade from the instructor, or having failed to obtain such an explanation notwithstanding a serious attempt to do so, a student who believes that the grade assigned to his or her work is the result of a significant error or injustice may apply to the Examinations Committee for review.
Students may apply for review of any grade that is taken into account in determining the final grade in a course.
Students may not apply for review of a grade until the final grade for the course has been determined.

15.3 Grounds for Granting Review

Where it appears that the grade assigned to a student's work may be the result of a significant error or injustice, the student is entitled to have the grade reviewed.
The onus is on the student to identify specific facts or evidence suggesting that a significant error or injustice may have occurred. Examples of such facts or evidence may include, without limitation:
- facts raising a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the instructor;
  facts showing that the student received materially different treatment in the evaluation process in comparison with that received by other students;
- facts showing a clear and significant departure from a marking key or other evaluation guide in the evaluation of the student’s work;
- facts showing a clear and demonstrable error of law made in the evaluation of the student’s work;
- the written opinion of the instructor that a significant error or injustice occurred in his or her evaluation of the student’s work;
- any other facts or evidence suggesting that a significant error or injustice may have occurred.
The following are examples of facts which will not be accepted as evidence that a significant error or injustice may have occurred:
- the grade does not reflect the amount of work the student put into the course;
- other students who did less or similar work received a better grade;
- the student tutored a colleague who received a better grade.
A student is not entitled to review of a grade merely on the basis that the student has been unable, despite a serious attempt, to obtain an explanation of the grade from the instructor. Similarly, a student is not entitled to review of a grade as a remedy for an instructor’s failure to fulfill the obligations set out in paragraph 14.2(b). In such cases, the appropriate recourse is to bring the matter to the attention of the Assistant Dean, Vice Deans or Dean, as appropriate, pursuant to Rule 23.

15.4 Application for Review

To apply for review, students must apply in writing to the Chair of the Examinations Committee. The application must describe, in detail:
- the efforts made to obtain an explanation of the grade from the instructor, or the student’s reasons for failing to make this effort;
- the grounds for believing that the grade received may be the result of a significant error or injustice.
The application must be accompanied by a copy of all documentary evidence in the student’s possession and on which the student wishes to rely in support of the application.
Applications for review must be submitted to the Academic Affairs Office within the following deadlines:
Fall term:         February 15
January term:   March 15
Winter term:    September 15

15.5 Review Procedure

Where it appears to the Examinations Committee that a significant error or injustice may have occurred, it must arrange for review of the student's work by two reviewers. In the case of examinations, the reviewers will normally be the original instructor and the co-examiner. In the case of other forms of evaluation, the reviewers will normally be the original instructor and another person selected by the Committee.
Each reviewer must read the student's work and recommend, with appropriate explanation, one of the following:
- the grade should be raised or lowered to ___
- the grade should not be changed.
A reviewer should recommend raising or lowering the grade only if she or he concludes that the original evaluation of the student's work suffered from serious error or was clearly unreasonable or unfair.
The recommendations of the reviewers must be submitted to the Committee for approval. If the recommendations do not coincide, the Committee will decide the student's final grade.

15.6 Appeals

A student who is dissatisfied with the outcome of an application for review may appeal to the Senate Committee for the Study of Individual Cases.

RULE 16: CONFIDENTIALITY OF STUDENT GRADES

Student grades and transcripts are confidential and may not be released or revealed to anyone other than the student without the student's consent, subject to the following exceptions:

Each instructor may receive a decoded class list that reveals the grades received by the students in his or her own course.
Faculty Committees may have access to student grades where necessary to carry out the work of the Committee.
The Dean, Vice-Deans, the Assistant Dean and their respective administrative staff may have access to student grades where necessary to carry out administrative duties.
The Faculty Editors of the University of Ottawa Law Review and the Tech Law Journal may have access to student grades for the purpose of selecting candidates.
Instructors of first year small group sections may have access to the grades of students in their section.
Access to student grades is permitted for the purpose of conducting research or compiling statistics for the Faculty or the University.

RULE 17: GRADING

17.1 Instructor to Grade Examinations and Assignments

Grading of all examinations and assignments to be taken into account in determining the final grade in a course is to be carried out by the instructor.
Notwithstanding paragraph 17.1(a), an instructor may have a properly instructed research assistant, internship supervisor or similar person grade part or all of an examination or assignment to be taken into account in determining the final grade in a course if expressly permitted to do so by the Vice Dean. In all such cases, the instructor nevertheless remains responsible for ensuring the appropriateness and accuracy of the final grade assigned.

17.2 Grades Provisional until Approved by Faculty Council

Grades on assignments, papers and examinations that are disclosed to students prior to approval of official grades by Faculty Council are provisional grades only and subject to adjustment by the instructor in order to satisfy the grading guidelines set out in Rule 18.

17.3 Letter Grades

Unless otherwise stated, students receive a letter grade for each course in accordance with the following schedule of grades.

Letter Grade	Percentage	Point Value	Definition
A+	90-100	10	Exceptional
A	85-89	9	Excellent
A-	80-84	8	Excellent
B+	75-79	7	Very Good
B	70-74	6	Very Good
C+	65-69	5	Good
C	60-64	4	Good
D+	55-59	3	Passable
D	50-54	2	Passable
F	0-49	0	Failure

17.4 Student Grade Point Average

(a) At the end of each year the student's yearly and cumulative grade point averages are calculated.
(b) A student's grade point average is calculated by dividing the number of grade points achieved by the student in his or her courses by the number of credits the courses were worth.
(c) Subject to the exception set out below in Rule 17.5:
- a student's grade point average for the year is calculated on the basis of all credits for which the student was registered in the year;
- a student's cumulative grade point average is calculated on the basis of all credits for which the student was registered to date in a program.

17.5 Satisfactory/Non Satisfactory

The Examinations Committee may approve courses in which students are graded on a satisfactory/non satisfactory basis or satisfactory/non satisfactory/satisfactory with distinction basis.
Where students are graded on this basis, the student receives credit for the course but the course credits are not included in computing the student's grade point average.

17.6 Dean’s List of Honour and Standing

The standing achieved by students in a year is determined on the basis of their yearly grade point average in accordance with the following scheme:

Top 10% of the class (per year, per program: LL.B. English, LL.B. French, LL.B. National Program) : Dean’s List of Honour
3.5 to Dean’s List of Honour cutoff: pass
below 3.5: fail

17.7 Ranking

A student's ranking is calculated by comparing the student's grade point average to that of all other students in the same year.
In first and second year students are ranked on the basis of their yearly grade point average only; in third year students are ranked on the basis of their yearly and cumulative grade point averages.
Students may receive upon request notice of their ranking, but this information does not appear on the official transcript.
Policy for the calculation of the grade point average and class ranking:
- For persons registered in the combined programs, either the LL.B.\M.B.A. or the LL.B.\M.A. (International Relations), the annual grade point average (AGPA) and the cumulative grade point average (CGPA) will be calculated counting only common law courses.
- Persons registered in the combined programs must have completed at least 24 credits in common law to be included in the class rankings by year and at least 78 credits in common law for the program class ranking.

17.8 Dean’s List of Honour

At the end of each year, an unranked list is prepared of the students in the top ten per cent of their class in
- the French Common Law program
- the English Common Law program
- the overall Common Law program.
This list is released to law firms and other prospective employers upon request.
A student's consent must be given before his or her name appears on the list.

17.9 Graduating With Distinction

Students may be awarded a degree with distinction on the basis of their cumulative grade point average in accordance with the following scheme:

8.5 - 10 and no F's: summa cum laude
8.0 - 8.4 and no F's: magna cum laude
7.0 - 7.9 and no F's: cum laude

17.10 Student Transcripts

Official transcripts set out the letter grade received for each course, the standing for the year and the cumulative grade point average but do not reveal class ranking.
Official University of Ottawa transcripts are only provided by the Office of the Registrar.
Transcripts of prior studies held in student files cannot be copied and provided to students for purposes such as applications to the Bar Admission Course, summer study programs, job applications, etc.

RULE 18: GRADING GUIDELINES

18.1 Course Grade Point Average

The grade point average for a course is calculated by dividing the sum of the grade points achieved by students in the course by the number of students.

18.2 Course Grade Point Average Guidelines

A course grade point average guideline is fixed for the following categories:
- elective (“thematic”) first year courses (English Program only)
- Alternative Dispute Resolution CML 1106/Introduction à la résolution des différends CML 1506
- other first year courses
- upper year seminar courses
- upper year non-seminar courses
For the purpose of these guidelines, a seminar course is a course with enrolment under twenty-five in which there is no final examination worth more than 40% of the final grade.
Course grade point average guidelines are fixed by Faculty Council and may be changed from time to time. The following guidelines currently apply:
- elective (“thematic”) first year courses (English Program only): 6.5
- Alternative Dispute Resolution CML 1106/Introduction à la
  résolution des différends CML 1506: 6.5
- other first year courses: 6.0
- upper year seminar courses: 6.5
- upper year non-seminar courses: 6.0
For greater clarity, no course grade point average guideline is applicable to the following categories of courses:
- courses with less than 10 registered students
- courses graded on a satisfactory/not satisfactory basis
- competitive moots
- directed reading or research courses
- internships
- courses in which registration depends on success in a competitive selection process
- other categories of courses as may be determined by Faculty Council from time to time.

18.3 Application of Guidelines

Before submitting the grades in a course, instructors shall calculate the course grade point average and compare this result to the applicable guideline.
Where the course is sectioned, the grade point average for each section of the course should fall within .4 of the applicable guideline.
Notwithstanding paragraph 17.3(b), where the course is sectioned, the difference between the grade point average for each section of the course and the applicable guideline may be as high as .8, provided that the spread between the grade point averages of the different sections of the course does not exceed .8.
Where the course is not sectioned, the grade point average for the course should fall within .8 of the applicable guideline.
For the purpose of these guidelines, a course is sectioned if there is more than one English section or more than one French section of the course in a term.

18.4 Failure to Comply

Instructors who do not comply with the guideline policy shall submit a written explanation to the Academic Administrator for presentation to and consideration by Faculty Council.
Where the course taught is a sectioned course, instructors who do not comply with the guideline policy are also asked to give notice of their non-compliance to the other instructors of the course.

RULE 19: PASSING AND FAILURE

19.1 Passing the Common Law Program

To successfully complete the Common Law program, students must pass first, second and third year and must fulfill all program requirements and (where applicable) French language program requirements.
National Program students must achieve a cumulative grade point average of 3.5 or higher in at least 30 credits in order to fulfill LL.B. degree requirements.
It is the responsibility of all students to:
- become familiar with the specific requirements of their program and with academic regulations;
- ensure that the courses chosen meet all program requirements and the requirements for graduation;
- ensure that they have completed prerequisites of chosen courses;
- ensure that the courses they have chosen are not given simultaneously;
- meet all the deadlines indicated in these regulations, published by the Academic Affairs Office, and indicated in the sessional dates section of the University timetable.
Any questions or uncertainties should be brought to the attention of the Academic Administrator.

19.2 First Year

In first year, students must take the required first year program as set out in the calendar for that year.
To pass the year, students must receive credit for all first year courses and achieve a grade point average of 3.5 or higher.

19.3 Upper Years

Students in second and third year, as well as National Program students, must take 13 - 17 credits during the Fall term, 3 or 4 credits during the January term, 10 - 14 credits during the Winter term, and a minimum of 30 credits for the year.
To pass the year, students must receive credit for courses totalling at least 30 credits and achieve a grade point average for the year of 3.5 or higher.
Students who have taken summer courses at other institutions through a letter of permission may apply the credits to any academic term. Notwithstanding this, students must nevertheless at all times be registered in a sufficient number of common law credits to be considered full-time students.

19.4 Registration for Degree

In order that their names be submitted to Senate for graduation purposes, students who expect to complete their degree requirements must fill in the Registration for Degree and Request for Diploma form, which is available on-line, at the University InfoService as well as at the Academic Affairs Office. This form must be returned to InfoService no later than March 1 for spring convocation and no later than September 1 for fall convocation.

19.5 Receiving Credit for a Course

To receive credit for a course, students must receive a final grade in the course of D or higher, a “Satisfactory” grade or pass a supplemental examination.

19.6 Entitlement to Supplemental Examination

A student who achieves a grade point average for the year of 3.5 or higher is entitled to a supplemental examination in any course failed by the student in that year.
A student who achieves a grade point average for the year below 3.5 fails the year and is not entitled to supplemental examinations.

19.7 Method of Supplemental Examination

In courses where a final examination was given, the supplemental examination normally consists of a written examination set by the instructor covering the entire course.
In courses where no final examination was given, the supplemental examination normally consists of a substantial written assignment set by the instructor.
Instructors who wish to vary the normal form of supplemental examination may do so with the permission of the Examinations Committee.

19.8 Scheduling of Supplemental Examinations

Supplemental examinations shall be written at a time and place to be determined by the Assistant Dean in consultation with the Academic Administrator.
Supplemental examinations for first year courses other than Constitutional Law I CML 1213 shall be written in mid-June.
Supplemental examinations for upper year courses, in the case of non-graduating students, and in Constitutional Law I CML 1213 shall be written either during the Winter study week (in the case of Fall term courses) or in mid-June (in the case of January or Winter term courses).
Supplemental examinations for upper year courses, in the case of graduating students, shall be written either during the Winter study week (in the case of Fall term courses) or in late May (in the case of January or Winter term courses).
All students permitted to write a supplemental examination in a given course in each of the categories referred to in paragraphs 19.8 (b), (c) and (d) shall be required to write the supplemental examination at the same time and in the same place.
Exceptions to paragraphs 19.8 (b), (c), (d) and (e) may be made by the Assistant Dean on the basis of one or more of the grounds enumerated in paragraph 7.2(a). The onus is on the student to prove that grounds exist that justify any such exception.

19.9 Result of Supplemental Examination

Supplemental examinations are graded on a satisfactory/non satisfactory basis and do not affect the student's yearly or cumulative grade point average.
Students who pass the supplemental examination receive credit for the course and a "pass" is recorded on their transcript. However, the F is not erased and the student's grade point average remains the same.
Students who refuse to attempt or who attempt and fail the supplemental examination receive no credit for the course.

19.10 Failing the Year

A student fails first year if he or she achieves a grade point average for the year that is below 3.5 or fails, after supplemental examination, to receive credit for all first year courses.
A student fails second or third year or the National Program if he or she achieves a grade point average for the year that is below 3.5 or fails, after supplemental examination, to receive credit for courses totalling at least 30 credits.

19.11 Consequences of Failure

A student who fails first year is not entitled to repeat the year, but may apply to the Admissions Committee for re-admission.
A student who fails second or third year or the National Program may apply to the Examinations Committee for re-admission. The Examinations Committee will decide whether to re-admit the student and the terms for re-admission in light of the following guidelines:
- Upper year students who apply for re-admission will normally be re-admitted, but students with a record of failure may be refused.
- A student who fails because he or she did not achieve a grade point average for the year of 3.5 will normally be required to repeat the year.
- A student who achieves a grade point average for the year of 3.5 or higher
  but fails to successfully complete the required number of credits will normally be required to make up the credits.

RÈGLE 20 : PROGRAMME DE COMMON LAW EN FRANÇAIS

20.1 Promotion du programme de common law en français

Les conditions de la promotion au programme de common law en français sont décrites au paragraphe 20.2 du présent règlement. La personne admise à ce programme doit se conformer à toutes ces exigences, sous réserve des exceptions prévues aux paragraphes 20.3 et 20.4.

20.2 Exigences de la promotion

L‘étudiant ou l’étudiante doit :

suivre tous les cours de première année en français et obtenir la note de passage dans chacun;
obtenir 75 p. 100 des crédits de deuxième et troisième année dans des cours en français;
suivre les cours CML 2713. Droit constitutionnel II (partage des pouvoirs) et CML 2709. Procédure civile I et tout autre cours obligatoire en français et obtenir la note de passage dans chacun;
satisfaire à l’exigence du tribunal-école en français;
rédiger un mémoire de recherche en français dans un cours suivi en français;
rédiger en français tous les travaux et les examens exigés dans les cours suivis en français;
satisfaire à toutes les exigences de la promotion du programme de LL.B. énoncées à la règle 19 du présent règlement.

20.3 Dérogation à la règle des crédits de deuxième et troisième année en français

Dans des cas très exceptionnels seulement, le doyen adjoint peut autoriser une dérogation à la règle prévoyant que l’étudiant doit obtenir 75 p. 100 de ses crédits de deuxième et troisième année dans des cours en français. La demande doit être présentée par écrit au doyen adjoint, en précisant les raisons motivant la mesure recherchée.

20.4 Programmes conjoints

L’alinéa 20.2b) s’applique aux étudiants des programmes conjoints. Le doyen adjoint approuvera le choix de cours de ces étudiants en conformité avec l’esprit de la règle 19.

20.5 Dérogation à la règle du mémoire de recherche en français

Exceptionnellement, le doyen adjoint peut permettre à un étudiant de rédiger son mémoire de recherche en français dans un cours en anglais, si le professeur est en mesure d’évaluer la qualité de la rédaction française. L’étudiant doit obtenir cette autorisation avant la date fixée par l’administratrice scolaire pour la remise du formulaire de désignation du mémoire de recherche.

20.6 Attestation d’études en français

Lorsque l’étudiant inscrit au programme régulier ou à un programme conjoint a satisfait à toutes les exigences du programme de common law en français, l’attestation suivante apparaîtra sur son relevé de notes :

« ‘Nom de l‘étudiant’ a satisfait aux exigences du programme de common law en français de l’Université d‘Ottawa ».

20.7 Changement de programme d’études

Un étudiant peut demander le transfert au programme de common law en anglais en présentant une demande d’admission au Comité des admissions du programme anglais avant la date limite fixée. Un facteur déterminant sera si la personne était admissible au programme anglais au moment de son admission initiale. Un changement de programme ne peut se faire durant la première année d’études.

RULE 21: NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON ACCREDITATION AND SPECIAL STUDENTS

21.1 Receiving Credit for a Course

To receive credit for a course, National Committee on Accreditation (‘NCA’) and special students must receive a final grade in the course of D or higher, a “Satisfactory” grade or pass a supplemental examination.

21.2 Entitlement to Supplemental Examination

In order to be eligible for a supplemental examination, an NCA or special student must achieve a cumulative grade point average of at least 3.5 at the end of the term during which the student failed the course in question or, in the case where the student is taking first-year courses, at the end of the academic year.
All other aspects of the supplemental examination are governed by the general regulations to that effect in Rule 19

21.3 Maintaining Standing

An NCA or special student must achieve a cumulative grade point average of at least 3.5 at the end of each academic term during which she or he is registered in a course in order to maintain standing and be permitted to take courses in subsequent terms. If the student is taking first-year courses, the determination of standing will be made at the end of the academic year. Failure to achieve the minimum grade point average will result in withdrawal from the Section.
An NCA or special student who is withdrawn under this Regulation may apply to the Examinations Committee for re-admission. The Examinations Committee will decide whether to re-admit the student and the terms for re-admission.

RULE 22: CLASS CANCELLATION

22.1 General Provisions

Instructors are expected to teach all of their scheduled classes and should only cancel classes in exceptional circumstances.
Instructors should give notice to students of any proposed cancellation at least one week in advance when feasible.
Instructors should give notice of all class cancellations to the Academic Affairs Office.
Instructors should reschedule all cancelled class hours with the assistance of the Academic Affairs Office.
Make-up classes should be rescheduled so as to avoid conflict with other scheduled regular and make-up classes. Instructors should not schedule make-up classes for the last three weeks of the term, except for the purpose of replacing classes missed in that period.
Instructors may not schedule make-up classes for hours lost due to statutory or University holidays.
Instructors may schedule extra sessions to be attended on a purely voluntary basis by the students subject to the following limitations:
- extra sessions should not be used to cover additional substantive materials but their use may extend to providing students with opportunities to practice their problem-solving skills;
- extra sessions should be scheduled through the Academic Affairs Office and must not conflict with other scheduled regular or make-up classes.

22.2 Particular Provisions Applicable to January Term

Notwithstanding the provisions of section 21.1, the following provisions shall apply to January term courses:

No make-up classes shall be scheduled during the last week of the January term.
Instructors shall not schedule make-up classes for more than two days of missed instruction.
Instructors may provide for an equivalent to classroom instruction in lieu of scheduling a make-up class, provided that the combined total of such equivalents and any make-up classes does not correspond to more than two days of missed instruction.

RULE 23: MATTERS OF STUDENT CONCERN

23.1 Student Evaluation

Questions or problems concerning any aspect of student evaluation should be brought to the attention of the Assistant Dean or the Academic Administrator.

23.2 Teaching

Questions or problems concerning the content or teaching of courses or related matters should be brought to the attention of the Dean or the Vice Deans.

RULE 24: ACADEMIC FRAUD

Academic fraud is governed by the University Regulation on Academic Fraud, appended hereto as Appendix A.

APPENDIX A

UNIVERSITY REGULATION ON ACADEMIC FRAUD

(Approved by the Senate on September 13, 2010)

Definition

1. Academic fraud is an act by a student that may result in a false academic evaluation of that student or of another student. Without limiting the generality of this definition, academic fraud occurs when a student commits any of the following offences:

a) commits plagiarism or cheating of any kind (to obtain more information on plagiarism and how to avoid it, consult our Web site at www.uottawa.ca/plagiarism.pdf);

b) submits a work of which the student is not the author, in whole or in part – except for duly cited quotations or references. Such work may include an academic paper, an essay, a test, an exam, a research report, a thesis, whether written, oral, or in another form;

c) presents research data that has been falsified or concocted in any way;

d) attributes a purported statement of fact or reference to a source that has been concocted;

e) submits the same work or significant part thereof for more than one course, or a thesis or other work that has already been submitted elsewhere, without written authorization from the professors concerned and/or of the academic unit concerned;

f) falsifies an academic evaluation, misrepresents an academic evaluation, uses a forged or falsified academic record or supporting document, or facilitates the use of a falsified academic record or supporting document;

g) undertakes any other action for the purpose of falsifying an academic evaluation.

Sanctions

2. A student who has committed or attempted to commit academic fraud, or who has been a party to academic fraud, is subject to one or more of the following sanctions:

a) a written reprimand;

b) the mark of F or zero for part of the work concerned;

c) the mark of F or zero for the work concerned;

d) the mark of F or zero for the work concerned and the loss of additional marks for the course concerned;

e) the mark of F or zero for the work concerned, with no more than the passing grade as a final mark for the course concerned;

f) the mark of F or zero for the course concerned;

g) the loss of all or part of the credits for the academic year concerned (the courses for which credits were withdrawn remain in the student’s file – they are included in the grade point average and must be repeated or replaced by other courses at the discretion of the Faculty);

h) an additional requirement of 3 to 30 credits added to the student’s program of studies (additional credit requirements that are added to the student’s program of studies as part of an academic fraud sanction will also apply to any subsequent program of the same level in which the student registers);

i) the loss of any opportunity to receive a scholarship from the Faculty for one year;

j) the loss of any opportunity to receive a scholarship from the Faculty until graduation;

k) suspension from the program or from the Faculty, for at least one session and at most three academic years;

l) expulsion from the Faculty;

m) the loss of any opportunity to receive a scholarship from the University of Ottawa for one year;

n) the loss of any opportunity to receive a scholarship from the University of Ottawa until graduation;

o) expulsion from the University of Ottawa for at least three years, it being understood that three years after being expelled, the student concerned may ask the Senate Appeals Committee to review his or her case, with the possibility, where applicable, of having the notice of expulsion withdrawn from the student’s transcript – if the student reapplies for admission, the regular admission process shall apply;

p) cancellation or revocation of a degree, diploma or certificate where the offence relates to the eligibility to receive such degree, diploma or certificate, and which was discovered or determined after its award;

q) inclusion of the following statement in the student’s academic transcript: “Sanction pursuant to contravention of the University regulation on fraud.”

Decisions

3. Sanctions stipulated in sections 2(a) to 2(k) are imposed by the Faculty in which the student is registered. Sanctions 2(l) to 2(q) are imposed by the Senate Appeals Committee upon the recommendation of the Faculty. Decisions shall take effect immediately, notwithstanding appeal.

Procedure

4. Allegations of fraud are submitted in writing, with supporting documentation, to the dean of the Faculty that offers the course in question, with the exception of University of Ottawa graduate courses where all allegations of academic fraud are submitted to the dean of the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies (FGPS).

5. If the dean or the dean’s representative decides that the allegation is founded:

a) the dean informs the student in writing of the allegation made against him or her and provides a copy of all supporting documentation – if the student is eligible for the accelerated process, he or she will be asked to choose whether to follow the process described in the present regulation or the accelerated process;

b) the dean provides a copy of the present regulation and, when required, the Regulation on the Accelerated Process for Academic Fraud Cases;

c) if the student is not eligible for the accelerated process or if the student is eligible for the accelerated process but has opted for the process described in the present regulation, the file is referred to a committee of inquiry consisting of at least three persons appointed by the dean;

6. The committee of inquiry:

a) invites the student to present, in writing, within a prescribed time limit, any information or documents relevant to the allegation which has been made and, if it deems it appropriate, invites the student to appear before the committee;

b) solicits any other information that it considers relevant to its inquiry.

7. On the basis of this documentation and information, and once the student has been given the opportunity to be heard in writing and/or in person, the committee of inquiry:

a) either concludes that the allegation is not sufficiently founded and that no further action is to be taken; or,

b) concludes that the allegation is founded and prepares a summary report for the dean, which shall include a recommendation for the appropriate sanction.

The student is informed by the dean of the conclusions reached by the committee of inquiry and of the next procedural steps. The dean informs the student that he or she may submit comments on the report of the committee of inquiry, provided that such comments are made in writing within 10 working days following the date at which the report was sent.

8. The report of the committee of inquiry and, if applicable, the written submissions made by the student, are submitted to the executive committee of the Faculty or its equivalent, which either decides or recommends the sanction to be imposed to the Senate Appeals Committee, as the case may be.

9. If the sanction is one the Faculty has the power to impose, the decision of the executive committee of the Faculty or its equivalent shall take effect immediately, notwithstanding appeal.

10. The dean informs the student in writing of the decision or the recommendation made by the executive committee of the Faculty or its equivalent, and of the procedure to be followed should the student wish to appeal.

Appeal

11. A student who decides to appeal the decision of the executive committee of the Faculty (or its equivalent) or its recommendation to the Senate Appeals Committee, must so inform the Office of the Vice-President, Governance and provide the reasons for the appeal, within 10 working days following the date at which the decision or recommendation was sent.

12. The Office of the Vice-President, Governance transmits the file to the Senate Appeals Committee which:

a) invites the student to appear before the committee and/or submit in writing any information the student considers relevant;

b) solicits any other documentation or information it considers relevant.

13. The decision of the Senate Appeals Committee is final and cannot be appealed.

Fraud concerning more than one student

14. When the allegation of fraud involves students from different faculties, the case is submitted to the Faculty that offers the course, in accordance with the procedure set out in this regulation. At the graduate level, allegations of academic fraud are submitted to the dean of the FGPS.

Suspension

15. A student who has been suspended from a program shall not be awarded any credit for courses otherwise acceptable as part of the student’s program or as part of the overall requirements of the program, when such courses are taken, at the University of Ottawa or elsewhere, during the period of suspension which has been imposed. A mark of F (zero) will be assigned retroactively, if applicable, to any course so taken at the University of Ottawa, and tuition fees will not be refunded.

16. At the end of the period of suspension, the student will be authorized to continue the program once he or she has registered in accordance with the conditions applicable at that time.

Quick Picks

Common Law Section

Academic Regulations

TABLE OF CONTENTS

RULE 1: ACADEMIC REGULATIONS AND ATTENDANCE

RULE 2: Methods of Evaluation

RULE 3: TAKING COURSES IN OTHER FACULTIES

RulE 4: Examinations

RULE 5: INVIGILATION OF EXAMINATIONS

RULE 6: ADVANCE SCHEDULING OF EXAMINATIONS

RULE 7: DEFERRAL OF EXAMINATIONS

RULE 8: REWRITING EXAMINATIONS

RULE 9: WRITTEN ASSIGNMENTS

RULE 10: MAJOR PAPER REQUIREMENT

RULE 11: DIRECTED RESEARCH PROJECTS

RULE 12: STUDENT-PROPOSED INTERNSHIPS

RULE 13: EXTENSION OF DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTING WRITTEN ASSIGNMENTS

RULE 14: PROLONGED DEFERRALS AND EXTENSIONS

RULE 15: REVIEW OF GRADES

RULE 16: CONFIDENTIALITY OF STUDENT GRADES

RULE 17: GRADING

RULE 18: GRADING GUIDELINES

RULE 19: PASSING AND FAILURE

RÈGLE 20 : PROGRAMME DE COMMON LAW EN FRANÇAIS

RULE 21: NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON ACCREDITATION AND SPECIAL STUDENTS

RULE 22: CLASS CANCELLATION

RULE 23: MATTERS OF STUDENT CONCERN

RULE 24: ACADEMIC FRAUD

APPENDIX A

UNIVERSITY REGULATION ON ACADEMIC FRAUD