The balance of probabilities means that the panel will decide what, on base of all evidence, was more probable, i.e. more likely (as opposite to 100% guaranteed) to have happened. I I If you had particular extenuating circumstances that may have had an effect on you at the time of potential breach of suitability rules, it may be helpful to get a supporting letter from an objective third party. This could be a doctor, faith leader, coach or counsellor, if they were aware of your personal circumstances at the time. Such persons need to know the allegations and address the issue clearly; otherwise such evidence may be worthless. Where possible you should discuss the letter with your counsellor or doctor to make sure that they are aware you agree to your personal data being released. These details should include (where possible) confirmation of diagnosis, confirmation of time affected by the situation and an indication of the severity of your condition and the likely impact. It is recommended that you show a draft copy to the ARC before submission (you should not however let this cause you to miss the 5 working days deadline). There are many examples of circumstances which could have impacted on your behaviour, so if you are in any doubt whether you should include this in your response to suitability misconduct allegations, please speak to an ARC adviser. The Professional Suitability Panel may find that allegations were proven or that they were not. If the allegations are not proven, the case will be dismissed. Details of the potential outcomes can be found in paragraph 56 of the If your investigation also looked into academic or non-academic disciplinary issues, as opposed to a strictly professional misconduct issue, Panel may in addition impose other academic or penalties associated with the case. If the Panel decided to permanently exclude a student from the University because a concern relating to professional suitability has been proven, the student will normally retain any academic credits they have acquired but no professional award which includes a protected title can be made to such students, even if they have successfully completed the relevant parts of their assessed work. In these circumstances, only academic awards that do not confer an eligibility to practise can be made. the hearing, the Panel Secretary will write to you, normally within five working days of the decision, regarding the outcome of the case, setting out the Panel’s reasons for the decision.
The balance of probabilities means that the panel will decide what, on base of all evidence, was more probable, i.e. more likely (as opposite to 100% guaranteed) to have happened. I I If you had particular extenuating circumstances that may have had an effect on you at the time of potential breach of suitability rules, it may be helpful to get a supporting letter from an objective third party. This could be a doctor, faith leader, coach or counsellor, if they were aware of your personal circumstances at the time. Such persons need to know the allegations and address the issue clearly; otherwise such evidence may be worthless. Where possible you should discuss the letter with your counsellor or doctor to make sure that they are aware you agree to your personal data being released. These details should include (where possible) confirmation of diagnosis, confirmation of time affected by the situation and an indication of the severity of your condition and the likely impact. It is recommended that you show a draft copy to the ARC before submission (you should not however let this cause you to miss the 5 working days deadline). There are many examples of circumstances which could have impacted on your behaviour, so if you are in any doubt whether you should include this in your response to suitability misconduct allegations, please speak to an ARC adviser. The Professional Suitability Panel may find that allegations were proven or that they were not. If the allegations are not proven, the case will be dismissed. Details of the potential outcomes can be found in paragraph 56 of the If your investigation also looked into academic or non-academic disciplinary issues, as opposed to a strictly professional misconduct issue, Panel may in addition impose other academic or penalties associated with the case. If the Panel decided to permanently exclude a student from the University because a concern relating to professional suitability has been proven, the student will normally retain any academic credits they have acquired but no professional award which includes a protected title can be made to such students, even if they have successfully completed the relevant parts of their assessed work. In these circumstances, only academic awards that do not confer an eligibility to practise can be made. the hearing, the Panel Secretary will write to you, normally within five working days of the decision, regarding the outcome of the case, setting out the Panel’s reasons for the decision.
ARC-Best-Practice-Suitability-November-2017.docx