Student Conduct Statute

Council makes this Student Conduct Statute under section 284(1)(a) of the Act.

This statute comes into force on a date to be determined by the Vice-Chancellor.

This statute applies to students and staff members of the University.

The purpose of this statute is to provide for the good government and discipline of the University, and to support academic and research integrity.

Whenever the University receives a complaint about the conduct of a student, the following principles will apply:

(1) all relevant information will be considered and the complaint dealt with:

(a) in accordance with this statute and associated procedures, and any other relevant statute, regulation, policy documents in force at the time;

(b) in a fair and timely manner;

(c) in accordance with the principles of natural justice. This means that the University will:

i. ensure any decision maker is impartial, free from bias and has not made any predetermination, and

ii. ensure that any student suspected of misconduct is informed of the complaint against them and is given a reasonable opportunity to respond before a finding of misconduct is made.

(2) To the extent reasonably practicable, all processes will be followed in a way that safeguards the physical and emotional well-being and the safety and integrity of the University community.

(3) Students have a right to be accompanied by a support person and/or a representative throughout any process conducted under this statute and they must be informed of support available to them.

(4) To make a finding of misconduct, the decision maker must be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the allegation of misconduct is substantiated.

(1) Any member of the University community or any other person may make a complaint alleging misconduct by a student.

(2) The University will respond to complaints alleging misconduct by a student in accordance with this statute and any relevant procedures.

(1) There are two types of misconduct: academic misconduct and general misconduct.

(2) Where a complaint includes an allegation of both academic misconduct and general misconduct arising from one incident or closely related incidents, the Provost and the Registrar may decide that an allegation is to be the lead allegation of misconduct for the purposes of determining the misconduct procedures to be followed and deciding any penalty to be imposed or order to be made.

(1) All students have a responsibility to understand the requirements of academic integrity as they apply to their studies at the University.

(2) Breaches of academic integrity may be classified as one of two types: poor academic practice or academic misconduct.

(3) Minor breaches of academic integrity that result from inexperience or unfamiliarity with relevant academic requirements may be classified as poor academic practice. For the purposes of this statute, poor academic practice is not academic misconduct. Breaches of academic integrity classified as poor academic practice will be dealt with in accordance with the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedures. 

(4) Breaches of academic integrity not classified as poor academic practice will be dealt with as academic misconduct under this statute.

Academic misconduct is conduct by which a student does or omits to do anything which:

(a) Is intended to obtain or is likely to have the effect of obtaining for that student or any other person an unjustified or unfair advantage in assessment – whether or not the advantage was obtained; or

(b) Is inconsistent with scholarly practice or the responsible conduct of research, including compliance with relevant ethical and regulatory rules, requirements, policies and codes of conduct.

(1) Academic misconduct is classified as either category 1 academic misconduct or category 2 academic misconduct:

(a) Category 1 incidents are assessed as medium to low severity.

(b) Category 2 incidents are assessed as high severity.

(2) Relevant factors for determining whether academic misconduct is category 1 academic misconduct or category 2 academic misconduct include, but are not limited to:

(a) The overall impact of the breach on the academic integrity of the work;

(b) The legitimate interests of others;

(c) The interests and reputation of the University;

(d) Evidence that the breach is deliberately dishonest;

(e) Prior record of academic integrity breach or academic misconduct by the student;

(f) Penalties able to be imposed.

Note – See Student Academic Integrity Guidelines for examples of category 1 and category 2 academic misconduct.

(1) Authority to deal with category 1 academic misconduct is vested in the applicable table in the schedule to this statute.

(2) Suspected academic misconduct classified as category 2 academic misconduct must be referred to the Provost in accordance with the applicable procedures.

(3) The Provost may:

(a) Dismiss a case referred to them;

(b) Remit a case referred to them as a category 2 academic misconduct case, to be dealt with as a case of category 1 academic misconduct in accordance with the applicable procedures, if they consider that the case would be more appropriately dealt with in this manner, or

(c) Refer the case to the Discipline Committee.

(4) The Provost will prescribe such procedures for dealing with category 1 academic misconduct as required by this statute and otherwise as they consider necessary. Such procedures must not be inconsistent with this statute.

(5) Cases of suspected academic misconduct referred to the Discipline Committee by the Provost will be dealt with in accordance with Discipline Committee Procedures. 

(1) The penalties for academic misconduct vary with factors such as the seriousness of the academic misconduct, whether there have been previous instances of academic misconduct by the student, acceptance of responsibility by the student for the misconduct, demonstration of remorse, whether there are aggravating, mitigating or extenuating circumstances, and the student’s personal circumstances.

Category 1 academic misconduct

(2) One or more of the following penalties may be imposed in cases of category 1 academic misconduct in tests or coursework (which includes research components of less than 30 points), or in examinations (other than examinations of research work):

(a) Reduction of the mark for the piece of work to which the academic misconduct relates, down to and including a mark of zero; or not marking the piece of work, which is deemed to be a mark of zero;

(b) Reduction of the student’s final grade for the course by up to three grade steps;

(c) An oral or written reprimand, in terms considered appropriate in the circumstances;

(d) A direction to undergo an educational remediation workshop or programme to address the misconduct and improve the student’s understanding of academic integrity;

Note – Any such educational remediation programme will not be credit bearing.

(e) A requirement to give an undertaking as to future behaviour.

(3) The penalties that may be imposed in cases of category 1 academic misconduct in research work or in the examination of research work are as follows:

(a) In the case of sub-doctoral research work and in the case of examination of sub-doctoral research work, those penalties specified in section 11 (2) (b), (c), (d) and (e);

(b) In the case of doctoral research and in case of examination of doctoral research, those penalties specified in section 11 (2) (c),(d) and (e).

Note – While the penalty of grade reduction provided in section 11 (2) (b) can be imposed in respect of sub-doctoral research work, this is not possible in the case of doctoral research. This is because doctoral theses are not awarded grades.

(4) In any case of academic misconduct involving misuse of University facilities or services, the decision maker may, in addition to or instead of any of the above penalties, impose a restriction on access to all or any part of the University’s facilities or services for a period not exceeding one week.

Category 2 academic misconduct

(5) Cases of suspected category 2 academic misconduct referred by the Provost will be heard and determined by the Discipline Committee in accordance with the Discipline Committee Procedures.

Note – Only the Discipline Committee has authority to determine cases of category 2 academic misconduct.

(6) The penalties able to be imposed by the Discipline Committee for academic misconduct are set out section 22.

Suspected misconduct by a student (other than academic misconduct) on campus, in the context of any University activity, or where the suspected misconduct has a sufficient connection to the legitimate interests or concerns of the University may be dealt with as general misconduct under this statute.

General misconduct is student conduct (other than academic misconduct) that may reasonably be considered prejudicial to the proper functioning or interests of the University or to the interests of its students, and includes the following:

(a) Conduct in breach of a University statute, regulation, rule or policy;

(b) Conduct that contravenes a lawful and reasonable direction by a staff member;

(c) Conduct that impedes or prejudices teaching, learning, research or study within the University community, or that infringes the ability of others to participate in the life of the University;

Note – Conduct that ‘impedes or prejudices research’ could, for example, include instances where a student interferes with another student’s experiments.

(d) Conduct that is detrimental to the safety or well-being of other people, the effective functioning of the University, or the reputation of the University;

(e) Conduct that impedes or disrupts an examination (including an examination of research work), test, or other supervised assessment (but excluding dishonest or misleading conduct in connection with such assessment, which is to be treated as academic misconduct);

(f) Conduct that is dishonest or fraudulent (but excluding dishonest or misleading conduct in connection with academic assessment, which is to be treated as academic misconduct);

(g) Failure to comply with a penalty imposed or order made by a decision maker;

(h) Acting unreasonably towards a member of the University community.

(1) If satisfied that the presence on campus of a student suspected of general misconduct:

(a) presents an unacceptable risk to the safety of any person or to any property, or

(b) may impede any member of the University community in the conduct of their activities,

the Registrar may take interim action.

(2) Interim action may include, but is not limited to, exclusion from the campus or any designated part of the campus, or exclusion from attendance (whether in person or via remote means) at all or any specified classes, events or other activities.

(3) Unless impracticable in the circumstances, before deciding to take any interim action, the student must be given a reasonable opportunity to comment on the proposed interim action.

(4) In each case, the interim action takes and remains in effect for the period specified by the Registrar.

(5) Nothing in this section limits rule 2 of the University’s Campus Rules or the Registrar’s authority to issue a trespass notice.

(1) General misconduct may be classified as category 1 general misconduct or category 2 general misconduct:

(a) Category 1 incidents are assessed as medium to low severity.

(b) Category 2 incidents are assessed as high severity.

(2) Relevant factors for determining whether general misconduct is category 1 general misconduct or category 2 general misconduct include, but are not limited to:

(a) The harm done to any person affected by the conduct;

(b) The legitimate interests of others;

(c) The interests and reputation of the University;

(d) The deliberateness of the conduct;

(e) Prior record of misconduct by the student;

(f) Penalties able to be imposed.

(1) Authority to deal with general misconduct is vested in the applicable table in the schedule to this statute.

(2) Suspected general misconduct classified as category 2 general misconduct must be referred to the Registrar in accordance with the applicable procedures.

(3) The Registrar may:

(a) dismiss a case referred to them; or

(b) remit a case referred to them as a category 2 general misconduct case, to be dealt with as a case of category 1 general misconduct in accordance with the applicable procedures, if they consider that the case would be more appropriately dealt with in this manner, or

(c) refer the case to the Discipline Committee.

(4) The Registrar will prescribe such procedures for dealing with category 1 general misconduct as required by this statute and otherwise as they consider necessary. Such procedures must not be inconsistent with this statute.

(5) Cases of suspected general misconduct referred to the Discipline Committee by the Registrar will be dealt with in accordance with Discipline Committee Procedures. 

(1) Penalties imposed and/or orders made for general misconduct should, where possible, seek to promote accountability, to address harm and to repair any damage caused or contributed to by the general misconduct.

(2) The penalties for general misconduct vary with factors such as the seriousness of the misconduct, whether there have been previous instance(s) of misconduct by the student, acceptance of responsibility by the student for the misconduct, demonstration of remorse, whether there are aggravating, mitigating or extenuating circumstances, and the student’s personal circumstances.

Category 1 general misconduct

(3) One or more of the following penalties may be imposed in cases of category 1 general misconduct:

(a) A fine not exceeding $500;

(b) An oral or written warning or reprimand, in terms considered appropriate in the circumstances;

(c) A requirement to undergo an educational or supervision programme;

(d) A requirement to give an undertaking as to future behaviour.

(4) In any case of general misconduct involving misuse of University facilities or services, the decision maker may, in addition to or instead of any of the above penalties, impose a restriction on access to all or any part of the University’s facilities or services for a period not exceeding one week.

(5) In addition to, or instead of imposing any of the above penalties, the following orders may be made:

(a) An order to pay compensation (not exceeding $500) for any loss or damage caused by or arising from the misconduct;

(b) An order for restitution requiring the return of property of any kind to a specified person.

Category 2 general misconduct

(6) Cases of suspected category 2 general misconduct referred by the Registrar will be heard and determined by the Discipline Committee in accordance with the Discipline Committee Procedures.

Note – Only the Discipline Committee has authority to determine cases of category 2 general misconduct.

(7) The penalties and orders able to be imposed or made by the Discipline Committee are set out in section 22.

A committee of Council called the Discipline Committee is constituted under this statute to hear and determine cases of suspected academic misconduct and suspected general misconduct referred to the Discipline Committee in accordance with this statute and procedures made under this statute.

(1) The Vice-Chancellor will appoint to the Discipline Committee, as required from time to time:

(a) No fewer than 4 student members of Senate;

(b) No fewer than 4 academic staff members of Senate;

(c) Any number of academic staff who are not members of Senate;

(d) Any number of professional staff members;

(e) At least one person with expertise in sexual harm matters. Such appointee may be external to the University.

(2) From among those members, the Vice-Chancellor will appoint:

(a) 1 member to be the chair, and

(b) 1 or more members to be a deputy chair to act in the place of the chair as required.

(3) In a case involving an allegation of sexual harm, a member with expertise in sexual harm matters must be on the Committee hearing the case.

(1) Except as otherwise provided sections 20(2) and s20(3), the Discipline Committee to hear any case of academic misconduct must comprise the following members (including the chair):

(a) 2 student members of Senate;

(b) 1 academic staff member of Senate;

(c) 2 academic staff members who need not be members of Senate.

(2) Where the Discipline Committee is scheduled to hear a case of academic misconduct in accordance with section 20(1), and one of the five members scheduled to attend the hearing does not attend at the scheduled time, the chair may decide that the Discipline Committee, comprised of the four members in attendance, will proceed to hear the case.

(3) Where the chair determines it is necessary to hear a case of academic misconduct expeditiously and the case cannot be scheduled for a hearing by the Discipline Committee as comprised under section 20(1) on an expeditious basis due to the unavailability of the members, the chair may decide that the Discipline Committee, comprised of the following members (including the chair), will proceed to hear the case:

(a) 1 student member of Senate;

(b) 1 academic staff member of Senate;

(c) 1 academic staff member who need not be a member of Senate.

(4) Except as otherwise provided sections 20(5) and s20(6), the Discipline Committee to hear any case of general misconduct must comprise the following members (including the chair):

(a) 2 student members of Senate;

(b) 1 academic staff member of Senate;

(c) 2 members who are academic staff members, professional staff members, and/or external specialist members, in any combination.

(5) Where the Discipline Committee is scheduled to hear a case of general misconduct in accordance with section 20(3), and one of the five members scheduled to attend the hearing does not attend at the scheduled time, the chair may decide that the Discipline Committee, comprised of the four members in attendance, will proceed to hear the case.

(6) Subject to section 19(3), where the chair determines it is necessary to hear a case of general misconduct expeditiously and it cannot be scheduled for a hearing by the Discipline Committee as comprised under section 20(4) on an expeditious basis due to the unavailability of the members, the chair may decide that the Discipline Committee, comprised of the following members (including the chair) will proceed to hear the case:

(a) 1 student member of Senate;

(b) 1 academic staff member of Senate;

(c) 1 further member who may be an academic staff member, professional staff member, or external specialist member.

(7) Decisions made by the Discipline Committee will be by simple majority vote.

(8) Where the Discipline Committee hearing a case is comprised of four members under section 20(2) or 20(5), in the event of a tied vote, the chair will have a casting vote in addition to a deliberative vote.

(1) The Discipline Committee may:

(a) Dismiss a case of suspected academic misconduct or suspected general misconduct referred to it;

(b) Remit a case of suspected category 2 misconduct referred to it, to be dealt with as a case of suspected category 1 misconduct in accordance with the applicable procedures;

(c) Hear and determine cases of suspected academic misconduct or suspected general misconduct cases referred to it;

(d) Impose such penalties and make such orders as set out in section 22 of this statute that the Discipline Committee considers appropriate.

(2) Where at the time of the meeting the student is no longer enrolled in a programme of study at the University, the Discipline Committee may make a finding that misconduct has occurred, but may not impose a penalty, other than a penalty provided in section 22 (1) (d) or (e), or make an order for compensation or restitution.

(3) To avoid doubt, while the Discipline Committee can make a finding that a University statute, rule, regulation or policy has been breached, it cannot make a finding that a crime under the Crimes Act 1961 or that an offence under any other statute has been committed.

(1) The Discipline Committee may impose the following penalties:

(a) Cancellation of the student’s enrolment (i.e. expulsion from the University);

(b) Suspension of the student from attendance at the University for a specified period of time, not exceeding a period of 2 years;

(c) A fine not exceeding $5000;

(d) For academic misconduct, reduction of the mark for the piece of work to which the academic misconduct relates, down to and including a mark of zero; or not marking the piece of work, which is deemed to be a mark of zero;

(e) For academic misconduct, reduction of the student’s grade for the course to which the academic misconduct relates, down to and including a grade of “Fail”;

(f) An oral or written reprimand, in terms considered appropriate in the circumstances;

(g) For academic misconduct, a direction to undergo an educational remediation workshop or programme to address the misconduct and improve the student’s understanding of academic integrity;

Note – Any such educational remediation programme will not be credit bearing.

(h) For general misconduct, a requirement to undergo an educational or supervision programme;

(i) A requirement to give an undertaking as to future behaviour.

(2) In addition to, or instead of imposing any of the above penalties the following orders may be made:

(a) an order to pay compensation (not exceeding $2,000) for any loss or damage caused by or arising from the misconduct;

(b) an order for restitution requiring the return of property of any kind to a specified person.

(3) In any case of academic misconduct or general misconduct involving misuse of University facilities or services, the Discipline Committee may, in addition to or instead of any of the above penalties, impose a restriction on access to all or any part of the University’s facilities or services for such period considered appropriate in the circumstances.

(4) In the case of breach of a University statute, regulation, rule or policy, the Discipline Committee may impose any penalty or make any order able to be imposed or made under the relevant statute, regulation, rule or policy instead of or in addition to the penalties or orders able to be imposed under this statute.

(5) The chair of the Discipline Committee, of their own volition or at the request of the student, and on such conditions (if any) they consider appropriate, may suspend the operation of any penalty imposed or order made pending the outcome of a review carried out by the Student Conduct Review Committee.

(1) Cases of suspected academic misconduct and suspected general misconduct referred to the Discipline Committee are to be dealt with in the manner set out in the Discipline Committee Procedures prescribed by the Vice-Chancellor. Such procedures must not be inconsistent with this statute.

(2) Where a procedure is not specified in the Discipline Committee Procedures, the Discipline Committee may adopt such fair and reasonable procedure as it considers necessary and appropriate to provide for the good government and discipline of the University. Any such procedure must comply with the requirements of natural justice.

(1) A student upon whom a penalty is imposed may request a review of:

(a) the finding that the student has committed academic or general misconduct; or

(b) the penalty imposed on the student; or

(c) both the finding and the penalty imposed

(2) Where applicable, such student may also request a review of an order made against them for compensation or restitution.

(3) Any such request must be submitted to a reviewer in accordance with the applicable review procedures.

(4) To avoid doubt a complainant cannot request a review of any finding, penalty or order made.

(1) The reviewer may either uphold or set aside any decision under review.

(2) A reviewer must not set aside a decision on review unless satisfied that:

(a) the finding of misconduct was unfair because of some material defect in the procedure followed; or

(b) the finding of misconduct was incorrect:

i. on the information available to the decision maker; or

ii. on the basis that new information, which is credible and materially affects the outcome, was not previously available to the decision maker and could not with reasonable diligence on the part of the student have been made available to the decision maker;

(c) the penalty, or any order for compensation imposed was manifestly inadequate or excessive; or

(d) an order for restitution was not on the facts justified.

Note – Guidance as to how to carry out a review are provided in Guidelines for the review of findings, penalties and orders under the Student Conduct Statute.

(3) Where the reviewer, under section 25 (2) (a) or (b), sets aside the finding, the reviewer will substitute a new finding.

(4) Where the reviewer, under section 25 (2) (c) or (d), sets aside the penalty and/or order, the reviewer may substitute a new penalty or order within the reviewer’s authority.

(5) The reviewer may increase the penalty or the amount of compensation ordered, provided that the student has been given advance notice of this possibility.

(6) Subject to section 38, the decision of the reviewer is final.

(1) Authority to review a finding of misconduct and/or penalty imposed, or order made in relation to category 1 academic misconduct or category 1 general misconduct is vested in the applicable table in the schedule to this statute.

(2) A reviewer of a case involving category 1 misconduct may only impose such penalties able to be imposed or make such order able to be made for the relevant category 1 misconduct.

(3) The procedures for the review of a finding and/or penalty imposed, or order made in relation to category 1 academic misconduct will be set out in the procedures prescribed by the Provost for dealing with category 1 academic misconduct.

(4) The procedures for the review of a finding and/or penalty imposed, or order made in relation to category 1 general misconduct will be set out in the procedures prescribed by the Registrar for dealing with category 1 general misconduct.

Where a student requests a review of a finding and/or penalty imposed, or order made by the Discipline Committee, the review is to be carried out by the Student Conduct Review Committee constituted under section 28.

A committee of Council called the Student Conduct Review Committee is constituted under this statute to review the findings of academic and general misconduct made, the penalties imposed and orders made by the Discipline Committee.

(1) Council will appoint to the Student Conduct Review Committee:

(a) No fewer than 3 lay members of Council;

(b) The student member of Council;

(c) The academic staff member of Council;

(d) The professional staff member of Council.

(2) From among the members, Council will appoint:

(a) 1 member to be the chair; and

(b) 1 member to be deputy chair to act in the place of the chair as required.

(1) The Student Conduct Review Committee to review a case of academic or general misconduct will comprise:

(a) The chair, or in their absence the deputy chair;

(b) 3 other members.

(2) Unless not possible in the circumstances, one of the members of the Student Review Committee to review a case of academic or general misconduct must be the student member of Council or the academic staff member of Council.

Note – For example, it will not be possible for the student member of Council/academic staff member of Council to sit on the Student Conduct Review Committee if that position on Council is vacant, or if a conflict of interest prevents the member from participating in the review.

(3) Decisions made by the Student Conduct Review Committee will be made by simple majority vote.

(4) In the event of a tied vote, the chair will have a casting vote in addition to a deliberative vote.

Where a request is made under section 24 for a review of a finding made and/or penalty imposed and/or order for compensation or restitution made by the Discipline Committee, the Student Conduct Review Committee will carry out the review.

(1) The procedures for the review of findings made, penalties imposed or orders made by the Discipline Committee are set out in the Student Conduct Review Committee Procedures  prescribed by Council. Such procedures must not be inconsistent with this statute.

(2) Where a procedure is not specified in the Student Conduct Review Committee Procedures, the Student Conduct Review Committee may adopt such fair and reasonable procedure as it considers necessary and appropriate to provide for the good government and discipline of the University. Any such procedure must comply with the requirements of natural justice.

(1) Unless impracticable or inappropriate in the circumstances, where an investigator or decision maker is required under this statute to refer a complaint to another person, they must also refer to that person:

(a) any other complaint against the student arising from the same incident or series of incidents;

(b) any complaint against another student arising from the same incident or series of incidents.

Note – This will enable, where possible, the totality of the misconduct to be considered and assessed in terms of severity, and to be dealt with in an appropriate and, where applicable, consistent manner.

Any penalty or penalties imposed, or orders made, must be in respect of all findings of misconduct made against the student, having regard to the totality of the misconduct.

Note – Separate penalties should not be imposed for each finding made.

(1) Any fine imposed or monetary sum required to be paid pursuant to an order to pay compensation is to be paid to the University and, until paid, is a debt owed to the University. Any such debt that is not paid within 14 days of the becoming due may be recovered, along with any collection costs of recovery, through a debt collection agency, or court or tribunal process.

(2) Any such recovery does not prevent further disciplinary action being taken against the student under this statute.

Note – General misconduct includes a failure to comply with a penalty imposed or order made (see section 13 (g)).

(3) Where a student does not pay a fine or monetary sum required to be paid pursuant to an order to pay compensation under this statute, then, until such fine or monetary sums are paid in full, and without prejudice to the right to recover the unpaid fines or monetary sums at law, the Registrar may authorise one or more of the following:

(a) withholding the formal notification of the results of any examination (including examination of research work) of the student;

(b) declining to re-enrol the student;

(c) declining to release the student’s academic record;

(d) withholding any degree or diploma certificate from that student;

(e) restricting that student’s access to University services/facilities;

(f) charging a late payment fee not exceeding $50,

(g) imposing additional charges to recover legal and collection costs where a third party is engaged to recover those fees and charges.

(1) Every member of the University involved in a misconduct process under the statute (including the complainant, the person suspected of misconduct and any witnesses):

(a) Must keep confidential the process and any information relating to the process (including the details of any suspected misconduct, the identities of those involved, the decision made in respect of the misconduct, or the outcome of the process) except to the extent that they need to use that information for the purposes of the misconduct process or otherwise as required or permitted by law or the University’s Privacy Policy;

(b) May disclose information regarding the complaint or the misconduct process in order to obtain support or advice from their support people and relevant agencies.

Note – Nothing in this section prevents any person from making a complaint to other relevant authorities, including the New Zealand Police or professional bodies.

(1) A record of academic misconduct proceedings conducted under this statute and procedures must be entered into the Academic Integrity Misconduct System (AIMS) or into such other system as may be directed from time to time by the Provost.

(2) A record of general misconduct proceedings conducted under this statute and procedures must be entered into the case management system used by the Proctor’s Office from time to time for the management of cases involving general misconduct.

(3) Access to information relating to misconduct will be restricted to members of the University community who require access to such information to give effect to this statute or any relevant procedures, or otherwise to meet the University’s requirements, legitimate interests or legal obligations.

Note – Information in the relevant system may assist with classifying the misconduct as category 1 or category 2 or in deciding an appropriate penalty.

(4) Records must be held in accordance with the requirements of the General Disposal Authority. 

(1) The Provost may set aside a decision made (including any finding, penalty or order, or decision on review) in relation to a case of category 1 academic misconduct if they consider such decision was outside the authority of the decision maker, or is otherwise so fundamentally wrong as to be contrary to the good government and discipline of the University, and may refer the matter to the Discipline Committee to be determined.

(2) The Registrar may set aside a decision (including any finding, penalty or order, or decision on review) in relation to a case of category 1 general misconduct if they consider such decision was outside the authority of the decision maker, or is otherwise so fundamentally wrong as to be contrary to the good order and discipline of the University, and may refer the matter to the Discipline Committee to be determined.

(3) To avoid doubt the use of such special powers does not apply to any decision made by the Discipline Committee or the Student Conduct Review Committee.

This statute may be reviewed, amended or replaced from time to time.

This statute replaces and repeals the Statute for Student Discipline 2013 and the Student Academic Conduct Statute 2021 but specifically preserves all processes, proceedings, hearings, rulings and rights to review already commenced at the date this statute comes into force, under the Statute for Student Discipline 2013 and the Student Academic Conduct Statute 2021 until they have been disposed of under those statutes.

Act means the Education and Training Act 2020.

Academic Head means the person for the time being holding an appointment of head of department, school, or other teaching or research unit at the University; and includes:

• any person for the time being acting in that capacity
• their nominee.

Assessment Services Manager means the person for the time being holding an appointment of Assessment Services Manager at the University; and includes:

• any person for the time being acting in that capacity
• their nominee

Associate Dean Academic means the person for the time being holding an appointment of Associate Dean Academic at the University; and includes:

• any person for the time being acting in that capacity
• their nominee.

Associate Dean Postgraduate Research means the person for the time being holding an appointment of Associate Dean Postgraduate Research at the University; and includes:

• any person for the time being acting in that capacity
• their nominee

Associate Dean Research means the person for the time being holding an appointment of Associate Dean Research at the University; and includes:

• any person for the time being acting in that capacity
• their nominee.

Balance of probabilities means more likely than not.

Campus includes all land and buildings occupied or controlled by the University and all University vessels, vehicles and other equipment.

Complaint includes any oral or written report of a suspected incident of misconduct by a student.

Council means the governing body of the University.

Coursework, for the purposes of this statute, means assessments in taught courses (excluding examinations), including research components of less than 30 points.

Dean of Graduate Studies means the person for the time being holding the appointment of Dean of Graduate Studies at the University; and includes:

• any person for the time being acting in that capacity
• their nominee.

Decision maker means a decision maker identified in the Schedule or otherwise in this statute.

Director Campus Life means the person for the time being holding the appointment of Director Campus Life at the University; and includes:

• any person for the time being acting in that capacity
• their nominee.

Examinations means summative, time-limited assessments completed in the prescribed examination period.

Investigator is a person appointed to investigate academic or general misconduct under procedures made under this statute.

Manifestly means in a way that is clear or obvious.

Material means that the decision maker would likely have come to a different decision had they not committed the procedural defect/irregularity.

Member of the University means a member of the University community.

Policy documents includes all University policies, procedures and standards in force at the time.

Proctor means a person for the time being holding an appointment of Proctor at the University.

Provost means the person for the time being holding the appointment of Provost at the University; and includes:

• any person for the time being acting in that capacity
• their nominee

Registrar means the person for the time being holding the appointment of Registrar at the University; and includes:

• any person for the time being acting in that capacity
• their nominee.

Regulation refers to a type of statute.

Repair means to make good, to the extent practicable, the damage resulting from the misconduct.

Research work, for the purposes of this statute, means undergraduate honours and sub-doctoral postgraduate research components of 30 points and above, or doctoral research.

Reviewer means the person holding the position designated reviewer for the type of misconduct shown in Schedule 1 to this statute, or the Student Conduct Review Committee constituted under Part 6 of this statute.

Rule has the same meaning as defined in Campus Rules.

Senate is the academic committee established by Council under section s18(2) of Schedule 11 to the Education and Training Act 2020.

Staff member refers to an individual employed by the University on a full time or part time basis. This includes permanent, fixed-term or casual staff. members.

Statute means statute made by Council under section 284 of the Education and Training Act 2020.

Student means a person duly enrolled in a course of study at the University, and includes a person applying to enrol to be a student, as applicable.

Note – At the University ‘course of study’ has the same meaning as ‘programme of study’.

University means Waipapa Taumata Rau, University of Auckland and includes all subsidiaries.

University community includes all staff member (whether permanent, temporary or part time), honorary staff, students (whether full time or part time), contractors, subcontractors, consultants, volunteers, alumni, associates, business partners, official visitors or guests of members of the University or UniServices.

Vice-Chancellor means the person holding office for the time being as the chief executive of the University; and includes:

• any person for the time being acting in that capacity
• their nominee.

Education and Training Act 2020
Statute for Student Discipline
Student Academic Conduct Statute

Owner: Vice-Chancellor
Content manager: General Counsel
Approved by: Council
Date approved: 26 August 2024
Review date: 26 August 2029