I sent you the original message in case you didn't get it yourself, so now I
have to send this reply for the same reason!
I'll not send anymore unless you ask me.
Bernard

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Janusz [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 16 May 2002 12:16
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Academic Appeals: Legal Representation
>
> David - I am responding via the mailgroup as this is of general relevance
> and my comments may generate others to express their opinions. I was on
> the QAA group which wrote the code and we discussed this issue at length.
> Our view was that it was up to the student to decide who was to accompany
> him/her. The important word is that the student has a right to be
> "accompanied" by a person of his/her choosing - which is not to say the
> student can be represented by this person. Indeed, my view is that it
> would be improper for that to be the case as the whole point of such a
> hearing is that the student is putting his/her own case for consideration
> and the proceedings are definitely NOT adversarial in nature. We took the
> view that "reasonable costs" covered travel expenses and the like but
> definitely NOT the cost of engaging lawyers - image the consequences if
> institutions were to do so!
>
> I have recently been looking at a number of institutions "Appeals"
> procedures -including yours- and note that quite a few preclude the use of
> lawyers in hearings. As such academic appeal cases are "review" hearings
> rather than formal legal or quasi legal hearing or tribunals, I think this
> line CAN be sustained - but less so in the case of disciplinary hearings.
> To me, the key point is that the student is being accompanied rather than
> represented - which does not mean that the person accompanying the student
> cannot speak on his/her behalf - but it does restrict the person (lawyer)
> from getting involved in "cross examination" and legal argument!
>
> Janusz
>