By Vineet Malik | July 22, 2024 | London, England
In a most brazen conduct shown by City, University of London, just few days prior to a civil matter slated for a court of appeal hearing in the High Court (HC) in London not only agreed to pay the legal costs to the Appellant but also admitted to have violated its own sexual misconduct policies and procedures without providing any adequate reasons
The entire fiasco began between September 2020 and October 2021 when a City, University of London student – William Dalton (not real name) was involved in a sexual relationship with a co-university student.
In February 2022, the girl student filed a police complaint against Dalton for allegedly committing sexual assault. However, the Metropolitan Police failed to take any action.
Later, the girl took up the matter with the University, where-in Dalton was questioned in a probe through stage one and two disciplinary meetings.
However, details of allegations were concealed from Dalton. Stage two panel hearing concluded in June 2022 decided to expel Dalton once again without stating any reasons whatsoever.
Following such incidents raised Dalton’s anxiety. Despite, last and final stage three appeal filed before the University, the decision was upheld and Dalton continued to be expelled.
All the grounds were disputed by City, University of London.
Dalton was left with a remedy of approaching the Office of Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA).
However, Dalton challenged the University’s decision through judicial review that later reached the Court of Appeal in the United Kingdom (UK) HC.
Lord Justice Coulson in July 2023 granted permission to appeal on the explicit grounds of a breach of a procedural legitimate expectation and failure to give adequate reasons.
Lord Justice Coulson said “It was arguable that the original (very serious) allegations may not have been made clear to the appellant before he was questioned and where the reasons for the original decision by the stage two panel were on any view extremely meagre.”
The Court of Appeal listed in the HC before the Lady Chief Justice Nicola Davies in February 2024 maintained that “The OIA was not necessarily an adequate alternative remedy in cases where allegations of sexual violence against University students and that the issue needed to be seen in full context and not a purely arid question of law that can safely or properly be disposed of separately.”
Costs paid along with Admission of wrongdoing by City, University of London
The University decided to pay Dalton legal costs just few days prior to the Court of Appeal hearing scheduled in May this year. It also admitted to have contravened its own procedures and provided inadequate reasons for finding Dalton guilty of sexual misconduct that further led to his expulsion.
The University categorically admitted that the disciplinary process followed in Dalton’s case was flawed in its breach of its own regulations.
Eventually, the University agreed to withdraw the stage three decision entirely to reconsider Dalton’s case 'once again' at stage two of the disciplinary procedure and reinstated Dalton.
Dalton said “He and his family are wrestling with not inconsequential psychological and financial impacts of the more than two years of proceedings.”
Dalton will continue with his remaining module pending the outcome of the consideration of any further disciplinary proceedings, if started anew.
The Lady Chief Justice said “Statement of reasons provides useful guidance for students – both accused and those reporting and University struggling with difficult issues arising from investigations into allegations of sexual misconduct made against University students.
In August this year, City, University of London will merge with St. George’s University of London to form City St. George’s University of London.
Given the unfortunate and ugly episodes, The Revelation concurs that “City, University of London is law unto itself, that does not respect the law of the land and only put up pretence of complying rules in accordance with Regulations with a purpose of misleading the students by portraying itself as a just and fair institution."
Detailed reasoning should go to the root of the controversy and explanation thereto.
Providing reasons in decisions is of essence in any proceedings, be it at any stage of Appeal.
It is the reasoning which ultimately culminates into final decision which may be subject to examination of the Appellate or other higher authority. The decision derived at by the University cannot even be construed on the principle of Brevity. It is a settled canon of legal jurisprudence that any authority that is vested with discretionary powers but such powers are to be exercised judiciously, equitably and in consonance with the settled principles of law.
The said decision arrived at by the City, University of London is reflected by absence of reasoning that ipso facto indicate whimsical exercise by the University.
The universal laws clearly state that,
“Reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion, hence a decision should be a speaking one. A reasoned decision furthers the cause of justice as well as avoids uncertainty while it helps in the observance of law of precedent.
The absence of reasoning also negates the purpose of right of appeal by not achieving the ends of justice."
Thus, the Appellant was rightly entitled to know the reasons for rejection of all the appeals to secure the ends of justice.
City, University is part of the University of London that boasts of a unique federation of seventeen higher education institutions . It claims to deliver world-leading education and research across all disciplines.
A request sought for comments from City, University of London - President Professor Anthony Finkelstein and Press Office - Ms. Sophie Cubbin have so far not received any response.
City, University of London - President Professor Anthony Finkelstein and Press Office - Sophie Cubbin chose not to respond with their comments on a request made by The Revelation.
Comments