How do cases arise?

The most common case handlers are:

• Schools / Faculties – for academic malpractice and issues occurring within Programmes of study.
• Division of Residential and Sport Services – for misbehaviour that occurs in halls of residence.
• Advice and Response – for any case that may arise, but with particular attention to general misconduct and serious cases.

Below are some examples of where cases might arise from and who might handle them:

There are various ways to get in contact with someone at the University, including emails, phone and in-person, and there are various places someone can reach out to to discuss something of concern (also see our page on Support).  When something arises that concerns you, you should think about who the best person might be to speak to at the University and what your aim is in reporting something. 

Where it feels safe and appropriate to do so, someone may want to approach another person directly to discuss concerns informally to see if this can resolve the issue.

Where someone does report something to the University, and the Reporting Party is identifiable, they’ll likely be contacted by a member of staff at the University to learn more and to provide any signposting to support.

For something to go through the formal stages of discipline, you’ll normally need to be identifiable; the University is limited in what it can do with anonymous reports and may be unable to take a matter further.  Where a case arises in the context of a sensitive interpersonal matter, this will normally only proceed with a Reporting Party’s agreement.

In relation to student discipline, a student can start the reporting process by:

• Making a report through Report and Support. This won’t usually lead to any disciplinary action – it will more likely lead to the reporting party being contacted to explore the report further.  Where someone wishes to progress a matter further, we call this making a Formal Report.
• Regulation XVIII (Student Complaints Procedure) allows any registered student to make a complaint about part of their University experience.

However, the University is not limited to considering issues that have only come through the above routes.  For example, it may be that an issue arises from IT monitoring, an email, social media activity, a Campus Support and Security report etc. 

Section two of the Procedure for Summary Disciplinary Panels and the Procedure for the University Disciplinary Panel talks about the Assessment of a case.  This is not an assessment like an examination; it is a review of a case by an appropriate case handler at the University.  Another word to describe the Assessment stage could be ‘triage’ or ‘enquiry’.  You can find more information about how this stage works in practice on the Advice and Response website.

This stage could involve some information gathering and enquiry, but sometimes the information available is already sufficient enough to decide what should happen with a case.  The aim is to identify if a more detailed investigation/enquiry is required and to then decide, on the balance of probabilities (i.e. if something has likely happened), if there is a potential case of misconduct that requires further scrutiny by a formal disciplinary panel. 

Not all cases that go into the Assessment stage result in a referral to a disciplinary panel.  There may be found to be insufficient evidence that there has been misconduct.  Alternatively, a case handler may identify potential informal resolutions or a different process for a case to be considered under e.g. support to study.

Where a student has been involved in the Assessment process, or there may be a time delay in a case being referred to a disciplinary process, then it is good practice for the student to be informed of what is happening with a case.  Where a student is initially unaware of a case, then an invitation to a disciplinary hearing would give the sufficient notification of the case.

The Assessment stage may be fulfilled through different associated processes:

• For allegations of academic malpractice, cases should first go through the Academic Malpractice Procedure.
• For allegations of sexual misconduct and gender-based violence, cases should go through the Sexual Misconduct and Gender Based Violence Procedure.
• For allegations of a dignity at work and study nature, these may need to proceed through Regulation XVIII (Student Complaints Procedure) if a student has raised a formal complaint under that Procedure.

The Assessment stage may identify that it is necessary for further investigation into the issues being raised.  Some key bits of information that you may find helpful about investigations:

• There may be one or more investigators who consider the allegations raised. The University may refer a case to external investigators if there are, for example, capacity issues.
• The time it takes to investigate a matter may vary depending on the complexity of the case. For example, if there are multiple allegations to review and multiple parties to speak to, this may extend the process.  The investigator will keep the key parties updated on the progress of the case.
• Where information has been disclosed as part of a formal report, or otherwise during an investigation, that information will need to be relied upon and referred to during the investigation. To enable a party to respond to an allegation, or for a subsequent panel to consider a case, the University must aim for transparency in the process.  Only very sensitive information e.g. welfare-related, contact details, will normally be redacted.
• It is for an investigator to identify a reasonable level of enquiry needed to reach a decision – this could be reviewing documentation up to interviewing people. An investigator may decide to not speak to certain individuals e.g. character witnesses, or, if they make enquiries, whether these are by email or at an interview.  It is important for individuals involved in a case to not to speak to each other about it, to avoid compromising each other’s input.
• An investigator should provide sufficient detail of a case to a Respondent, so they know what they are accused of e.g. you are accused of breaking a window on the ground floor of the Library on the morning of 1 December 2024. An investigator should be open to sharing key information that is available and may assist an individual with responding to an allegation.   However, an investigator is not under an obligation to share the full evidence base, as this is often not finalised until the case has concluded, particularly when doing so may comprise the integrity of an investigation.  The full materials will be shared if a case proceeds to a disciplinary hearing. 
• An investigator will be empathetic to the individuals involved and will signpost on to support as appropriate, perhaps even linking in with individuals involved in providing support. However, the investigator will be independent of any party during the investigation and the final decision they reach will be based on established facts and University policy.  An investigator’s association with any party involved in a case is a professional one, not personal.
• Where an investigation is undertaken, it is expected that there will be some form of written outcome, whether this is a report, letter or both. These will set out what has been considered in a case and identify what any next steps in the process may be.  In sensitive cases, an investigator may arrange to deliver the outcome to a case within a meeting and may delay providing the outcome if a student does not want to see it.
• The investigator is not responsible for applying penalties to a Respondent. Penalties can only be issued through any later formal stages of the disciplinary process.
• Where a student is referred to a later stage of the disciplinary process, they do not need to accept the investigator’s conclusions and can make further representations to a disciplinary panel, who make the final decision, independent of the investigator.