S.L. 327.695 Art. 64

(1) The Doctoral Appeal Review Board may recommend to Senate any of the following decisions when considering appeals against a decision of the Board of Examiners:

(a) to reject the appeal, in which case the student shall be informed in general terms of the reason; or

(b) to require the student to revise the thesis and re-submit it for re-examination by the original examiners within a specified time limit; or

(c) to declare the examination null and void and direct the Faculty to conduct a fresh examination using the original Board of Examiners or a new Board of Examiners appointed by Senate; or

(d) to recommend to the Board of Examiners that, for reasons stated, they should reconsider their decision.

(2) Where a new Board of Examiners is appointed, the examiners shall be no fewer in number than those who originally assessed the thesis and/or practice, as applicable. The new members shall not be given any information about the previous examination except the fact that they are conducting an examination on appeal.

(3) When a new examination is taking place, the examiners should submit an preliminary individual report on the appellant’s work, conduct an oral examination and submit a final joint report.