Frequently Asked Questions

The legal definition of an appeal is a request for a higher tribunal to determine whether errors were made during the decision-making process at a lower level of review.

A student may choose to appeal a decision when they believe an error was made in the process or fairness on the part of the decision maker AND have a good reason for believing the decision should be different. What counts as a good reason (also known as grounds) depends on the kind of decision you are appealing, the applicable policy, and the level to which you are appealing. Successful appeals are based on, and clearly state, the grounds on which the appeal is being made and contain supporting evidence.

Ask yourself these questions:

1. Is there new information about you or your circumstances that the decision maker didn't know, and which might have made the decision different?
2. Did the decision maker make a mistake about a rule, policy or some other thing which might make the decision invalid?
3. Were you misled or misinformed through no fault of your own so that you inadvertently did the wrong thing?

No one at the University can prepare your appeal for you. However, the Office of the Ombudsperson is a confidential, impartial, and independent office that is available as a resource for students. Their website contains helpful guides, worksheets, and information relating to appeals (https://uwo.ca/ombuds//get-help.html).

The Office of the Ombudsperson is also available by phone, email, or face-to-face meetings to assist you in the appeal process.

Senate Review Board Academic (SRBA)

SRBA is the University’s highest level internal tribunal for academic appeals. SRBA’s jurisdiction is limited to the following academic appeals: 

1. Against a finding that your conduct amounted to a scholastic offence;
2. For relief against the penalty imposed as a result of the scholastic offence
3. To challenge a failure to follow, or to properly apply, a Senate policy;
4. For condieration of new evidence, not available at the time of the earlier decision, that casts doubt on the correctness of the Dean's decision;
5. Against general marking or grading practices;
6. To challenge a failure to observe a procedural requirement at the decanal level*; or
7. There was bias at the decanal level.**

University Discipline Appeal Committee (UDAC)

UDAC is a committee of the Board of Governors and is the University’s highest-level internal tribunal for non-academic appeals. UDAC’s jurisdiction is limited to the following:

1. The finding of misconduct was unreasonable or unsupportable based on the evidence before the Vice-Provost (Students) (VPS) or designate (if the sanction is forfeiture of University awards or financial assistance, suspension or expulsion);
2. The sanction imposed was unreasonable or unsupportable based on the evidence before the VPS or designate (if the sanction imposed was forfeiture of University awards or financial assistance, suspension or expulsion);
3. There was a serious procedural error in the hearing of the complaint which was prejudicial to the student;*
4. New evidence, not available at the time of the earlier decision, has been discovered, which casts doubt on the correctness of the decision; or
5. The VPS or designate did not have the authority under the Code of Student Conduct to reach the decision or impose the sanctions he/she did.

 Gender-Based and Sexual Violence (GBSV)

Appeals under the Policy on Gender-Based and Sexual Violence are reviewed by an Adjudicator. GBSV appeals are limited to the following:

1. The sanction imposed by the VPS or designate was unreasonable or unsupportable based on the evidence;
2. New evidence, not available at the time of the earlier decision, has been discovered, which casts doubt on the correctness of the decision; or
3. There was a serious procedural error in the hearing of the complaint which was prejudicial to the student.*

*For cases alleging a procedural error, in your Application, you will need to identify the specific policy or procedure that has not been followed and explain how it was not complied with. 

**For cases alleging bias, in your Application, you will need to provide evidence supporting allegations that the decision maker is predisposed against or in favor of one of the parties or a specific class of persons. This can be shown by remarks, decisions contrary to fact, reason or law, or other unfair conduct. The fact that the Dean did not grant the relief you requested does NOT constitute as evidence of bias without additional supporting evidence showing bias on the part of the decision maker.

When appealing, you must include relevant evidence in support of your grounds and circumstances relative to your appeal. Appropriate evidence will vary depending on your appeal.

Examples of commonly used evidence include, but are not limited to, a medical note, police report, death certificate or obituary, communications with decision makers, or a letter of support from a professional.

Senate Review Board Academic (SRBA)

A complete appeal must be filed with the Secretariat within six weeks of the date of the Dean’s final decision.  

University Discipline Appeal Committee (UDAC)

A complete appeal must be filed with the Secretariat within two weeks of the date of the final decision of the Vice-Provost (Students) or designate.

Gender-Based and Sexual Violence (GBSV)

A complete appeal must be filed with the Secretariat within thirty days of the date of the final decision of the Vice-Provost (Students) or designate.

Appeals must be made on an Application for Hearing or Appeal Application (Application) form. Each form explains the information that is required for a complete Application. Please carefully follow the instructions listed on the forms and submit all required documents. The Secretariat will not accept incomplete Applications.

Please submit your complete Application and supporting documents by email to secretariat-appeals@uwo.ca.

In all three types of appeals handled by the University Secretariat, your appeal will be seen by:

1. The University Secretariat staff who assist with the administration of your appeal;
2. The appeal panel or adjudicator who will be deciding your appeal;
3. The decision-maker for the decision under appeal (i.e., the Dean or Vice-Provost (Students));
4. In some cases, University Legal Counsel or external legal counsel.

Please note that other individuals may be consulted on a case-by-case basis.

All oral hearings are held electronically (via Zoom). 

After a decision is made on your appeal, you will receive a Notice of Decision as soon as possible. The Notice of Decision will provide the outcome of your appeal, with Reasons for the Decision to follow.

The University Secretariat, appeal committees, and adjudicators aim to prepare and issue Reasons for Decisions as quickly as possible. The typical timeline for Reasons for Decision is between 30-60 days, though this timeline may vary based on the volume of active appeals and the complexities of appeals.

Senate Review Board Academic (SRBA)

SRBA is the final level of academic appeal in the University; its decisions in substantive matters, and decisions as to jurisdiction and whether it will hear an appeal, are final. The President will entertain appeals against decisions of SRBA only when a party alleges a serious procedural error by SRBA.

University Discipline Appeal Committee (UDAC)

UDAC’s decisions are final. If a party alleges that there was a serious procedural error by UDAC that was prejudicial to the party, they may appeal to the President within two weeks of receipt of the reasons for decision.

Gender-Based and Sexual Violence (GBSV)

The decision of the Adjudicator is final. There is no further right of appeal.

Please contact secretariat-appeals@uwo.ca with any questions.