University of Leeds Academic Appeals: Procedure, Grounds, Deadlines and Solicitor-Led Support

A University of Leeds academic appeal asks the University to reconsider a formally published academic decision. Students must normally submit an appeal within 20 working days of the decision being published.

Students may appeal only a formal decision. Provisional marks, predicted degree classifications and outcomes that a Board of Examiners has not yet confirmed will not normally enter the academic appeal procedure.

In addition, a student cannot request a remark simply because they disagree with a mark, feedback or an examiner’s opinion. The appeal must rely on a ground recognised by the University and include relevant supporting evidence. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

The University of Leeds currently receives formal academic appeals through its Case Creator online case-building tool. Students should check the latest University webpage, their decision letter and the regulations that apply to their programme before submitting an appeal.

Solicitor-led academic appeals, complaints and misconduct defence

Ginkgo Advisory provides strategic advice, drafting and representation for students at the University of Leeds and other UK universities.

Our support is confidential, independent and tailored to the facts of each case.

Assistance can begin with an initial case assessment and continue through to the final written submission. Where the applicable rules permit it, we can also provide representation.

For a University of Leeds academic appeal, our solicitor-led service may include:

• Assessing the appeal grounds, deadline and prospects.
• Reviewing formal results, decision letters and applicable regulations.
• Analysing medical, academic, digital and procedural evidence.
• Drafting the Case Creator appeal submission.
• Preparing appeals involving mitigating circumstances.
• Drafting appeals based on unfair assessment or procedural error.
• Preparing submissions concerning inadequate supervision.
• Reviewing the School’s response to the appeal.
• Drafting the student’s final comments.
• Preparing for a Committee on Applications hearing.
• Drafting a final internal review request.
• Preparing student complaints and complaint reviews.
• Responding to plagiarism, collusion and contract-cheating allegations.
• Defending allegations involving ChatGPT or other generative AI tools.
• Preparing students for academic misconduct investigation meetings.
• Drafting complaints to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator.
• Providing representation where the University’s procedures allow it.

No adviser can guarantee an outcome. However, early professional advice can reduce errors involving procedure, deadlines, evidence and written presentation.

University of Leeds academic appeal deadlines

Procedure	Normal deadline
Formal academic appeal	20 working days after publication of the decision
Submission of key supporting evidence through Case Creator	Within two weeks after submitting the appeal
University preliminary review	Normally within 10 working days of receiving the appeal
School response to the appeal	Within 20 working days of the University’s request
Student’s final comments	Within 10 working days of receiving the School’s response
Investigation panel decision	Normally within 10 working days after receiving all necessary material
Notice of a Committee on Applications hearing	Normally at least 10 working days in advance
Written Committee outcome	Normally within 10 working days after the meeting
Final internal review request	Within 10 working days after the panel or Committee outcome
Final internal review decision	Normally within 20 working days of receiving the request
Review of a School-level academic misconduct outcome	Within 10 working days of the outcome
Review of a Committee on Applications misconduct outcome	Within 10 working days of the outcome
Final review of a student complaint	Within 20 working days of the central complaint outcome
OIA complaint	Normally within 12 months of the Completion of Procedures Letter

The University states that the full academic appeal procedure may take up to three months. Complex cases may take longer. (students.leeds.ac.uk)

What is a University of Leeds academic appeal?

An academic appeal challenges a formal decision made by an academic body of the University.

For taught students, an appeal may concern:

• Termination of studies.
• Required withdrawal from a programme.
• An examination result.
• A coursework or other assessment result.
• A placement or clinical assessment result.
• A decision not to award a degree.
• A final degree outcome.
• A degree classification.

For postgraduate researchers, an appeal may also concern:

• Required withdrawal from a research degree.
• A recommendation to transfer registration to MPhil.
• A research progress assessment.
• A doctoral thesis outcome.
• A viva voce examination outcome.
• A requirement to revise and resubmit a thesis.
• The research degree ultimately awarded.

The University’s academic regulations expressly allow students to appeal decisions concerning termination of study, examination or assessment results, non-award of a degree, and the degree or classification awarded. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Can a student appeal a provisional mark?

Usually not.

A student may appeal only a decision that the University has formally published. For taught programmes, the relevant Board of Examiners will normally need to confirm the result first.

The following will not usually qualify as appealable decisions:

• A provisional module mark.
• An unconfirmed coursework result.
• A predicted classification shown by a degree calculator.
• An informal opinion from a tutor about a likely result.
• A research decision not yet confirmed by the relevant Graduate Board body.

Students who do not know whether a decision is final should contact their School promptly.

However, an informal enquiry does not automatically extend the 20-working-day deadline. (students.leeds.ac.uk)

What is academic judgement?

Academic judgement means the professional academic evaluation made by an examiner, marker or academic body.

For example, the following arguments will not normally support an appeal:

• “My dissertation deserved a higher mark.”
• “The marker did not understand my argument.”
• “The feedback was too harsh.”
• “Another student received a higher mark.”
• “My result was close to the next classification.”
• “Another marker might have awarded more marks.”
• “I disagree with the examiner’s assessment of the quality of my work.”

The University may reject a case at the preliminary stage if it challenges only the examiner’s academic judgement.

However, a student may still challenge a procedural problem surrounding the academic judgement.

For example, there may be a valid ground where the University omitted a mark, applied the wrong assessment regulation or failed to implement an approved reasonable adjustment.

The key is to challenge the process, rather than ask the University to replace the original academic opinion with another one. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

What are the valid University of Leeds academic appeal grounds?

The current Academic Appeals Procedure identifies six main grounds.

Some grounds apply only to taught students. Others are particularly relevant to postgraduate researchers.

Ground 1: previously undisclosed mitigating circumstances

A taught student may argue that:

• Relevant mitigating circumstances existed.
• Those circumstances affected the assessment.
• The student had a good reason for not notifying the examiners or University earlier.

Relevant circumstances may include:

• Serious physical illness.
• Acute mental health difficulties.
• Hospital treatment.
• Bereavement.
• A family crisis.
• Trauma.
• A serious change in personal circumstances.
• A sudden deterioration in a disability or health condition.
• Another significant event outside the student’s control.

However, the student must address two separate issues.

First, what happened and how did it affect a specific assessment?

Second, why did the student not submit a mitigating circumstances application at the appropriate time?

The University defines a “good reason” as a circumstance outside the student’s control that prevented disclosure at the relevant time.

Personal embarrassment, a reluctance to disclose private matters or a wish to deal with the problem alone will not normally amount to a good reason. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

How can a student prove the reason for late disclosure?

A diagnosis alone may not be enough.

For example, a medical letter may confirm that the student had anxiety. However, it may not explain why the student could not contact the School or submit a mitigating circumstances application.

More useful evidence may include:

• A doctor’s explanation of the severity of symptoms during the relevant period.
• Mental health team records.
• Crisis service records.
• A counsellor’s statement.
• Hospital admission and discharge documents.
• Emails sent to a tutor at the time.
• Professional evidence explaining the student’s cognitive, communication or decision-making difficulties.

The written appeal should also identify the examinations, assessments or programme decisions affected.

Ground 2: failure to give adequate consideration to previously disclosed circumstances

A student may have notified the University about mitigating circumstances or another assessment-related disruption on time.

However, the student may believe that the examiners, Board of Examiners or another academic body failed to consider that information properly.

A strong appeal should not simply state:

“The University rejected my mitigating circumstances, so the decision was unfair.”

Instead, the student should identify:

• What information they submitted.
• When they submitted it.
• Which body had responsibility for considering it.
• How the outcome letter addressed it.
• Which important point the University overlooked or misunderstood.
• How that omission may have affected the result.

Relevant evidence may include:

• The mitigating circumstances application.
• A University acknowledgment email.
• Medical evidence.
• The Board of Examiners outcome.
• The School’s explanation.
• Programme regulations.
• The mitigating circumstances policy.

The University currently divides mitigating circumstances support into coursework extensions and additional consideration. Students should tell their School as soon as the circumstances begin to affect their studies. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Ground 3: unfair, improper or biased assessment

A student may appeal where the assessment process was unfair or improper, or where bias affected the evaluation of academic performance.

Possible examples include:

• A conflict of interest that the University failed to manage.
• Evidence that a marker had already reached a conclusion.
• Unfavourable treatment after the student raised an earlier complaint.
• Non-academic factors affecting the assessment.
• The University applying different rules to comparable students without justification.
• Conduct creating a reasonable perception of bias.
• A decision-maker’s involvement in an earlier dispute with the student.

Negative feedback does not automatically prove bias.

Likewise, a difficult relationship between a student and member of staff does not necessarily establish unfairness.

The appeal must identify specific conduct, emails, comments or decision-making steps. It should then explain how the issue affected the final academic decision. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Ground 4: a material procedural irregularity

A student may appeal where the University made a material procedural error in assessment or the handling of results.

“Material” means that the error had a significant consequence and affected the published result.

Possible examples include:

• An error in calculating the mark.
• Omission of an assessment component.
• Use of the wrong programme regulation.
• Recording a first attempt as a resit.
• Failure to carry out required second marking or moderation.
• Failure to place important evidence before the Board of Examiners.
• Failure to implement an approved reasonable adjustment.
• Use of the wrong form of assessment.
• Incorrect application of a late-submission penalty.
• An improperly constituted Board of Examiners.
• Failure to follow the formal placement or clinical assessment process.

A strong appeal should take three steps:

1. Identify the rule the University should have followed.
2. Explain what actually happened.
3. Show how the error affected the result.

A minor typographical error or administrative issue that could not have changed the outcome will not normally support an appeal. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Ground 5: inadequate supervision

Postgraduate researchers may appeal because of inadequate doctoral or research degree supervision.

Taught students may also raise supervision concerns involving a final project or dissertation.

Relevant issues may include:

• A prolonged lack of supervision meetings.
• Failure to provide feedback within a reasonable period.
• Conflicting guidance from supervisors.
• Failure to identify important research or assessment requirements.
• Long periods without a response to a research plan.
• Supervision records that differ materially from University expectations.
• Failure to provide the dissertation support promised by the programme.
• A supervisor withdrawing without the School arranging suitable replacement support.

However, the University may reject the appeal if the student had a reasonable opportunity to raise the concern earlier but did not do so.

Students should therefore retain:

• Supervision meeting records.
• Research progress reports.
• Emails.
• Unanswered requests for feedback.
• Programme or research degree handbooks.
• Supervision agreements.
• The School’s stated supervisory arrangements.
• Evidence showing that the student tried to resolve the problem.

The University states that an inadequate-supervision appeal will not normally succeed where the student could reasonably have acted earlier but failed to raise the matter. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Ground 6: unreasonable refusal of a suspension or extension request

This ground mainly applies to postgraduate researchers.

A student may challenge the University’s refusal of:

• A suspension of study.
• An extension of the research period.
• An extension of the thesis submission deadline.
• An adjustment to the research timetable because of health or another significant reason.

The student cannot succeed simply by stating that they disagree with the refusal.

The appeal should analyse:

• What application the student made.
• The grounds on which they made it.
• Which evidence the University considered.
• Whether the University overlooked important material.
• Whether the reasoning was consistent with the regulations.
• Whether the outcome was unreasonable on the evidence.

Medical, mental health, disability and research progress evidence may be particularly important. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

What is the difference between mitigating circumstances and an academic appeal?

The mitigating circumstances procedure allows a student to report unexpected difficulties promptly, usually before or around the time of the assessment.

An academic appeal takes place after the University has published a formal decision.

Therefore, a University of Leeds academic appeal should not be treated as an ordinary late mitigating circumstances application.

Students who experience health or personal difficulties should contact their School as soon as possible.

The University’s current mitigating circumstances arrangements principally include:

• Coursework extensions.
• Additional consideration.

Where a student did not use the procedure, a later appeal must explain why they could not act in time. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

What evidence should accompany an academic appeal?

The student has responsibility for providing enough supporting evidence.

The University’s current webpage lists possible evidence such as:

• A summary of the key issues.
• The outcome sought.
• Emails.
• Screenshots of text messages or social media chats.
• Photographs.
• Audio or video material obtained with permission.
• CCTV footage.
• Medical certificates.
• Medical appointment records.
• Letters from doctors.
• Supporting statements from third parties.
• A chronology.

A clear chronology is particularly important in postgraduate research cases.

Documents should show their original dates and times so that the University can assess their relationship to the assessment or relevant event. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Do not make secret recordings

The University states that it will not accept covert recordings as supporting evidence.

Secret recording may also create privacy concerns and could breach University conduct requirements.

Students who believe that recording is necessary should first obtain clear permission. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Evidence not written in English

All evidence should be in English.

Any document written in another language must include a formal or recognised English translation.

A student should not submit Chinese medical records without a suitable translation. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Can evidence be submitted later?

The current online guidance asks students to provide their key supporting documents within two weeks of submitting the case through Case Creator.

However, the safer approach is to provide complete evidence with the first submission where possible.

The procedure also states that where a student introduces new material later, they will normally need to explain why they could not obtain or submit it earlier. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

How should the evidence be organised?

A large number of documents does not necessarily make a case stronger.

Students may number the evidence as follows:

• Exhibit A1: formal result or decision letter.
• Exhibit A2: medical evidence.
• Exhibit A3: email to the tutor.
• Exhibit A4: mitigating circumstances application.
• Exhibit A5: relevant programme handbook provision.
• Exhibit A6: reasonable adjustment plan.
• Exhibit A7: chronology.
• Exhibit A8: requested remedy.

The appeal statement should refer to each exhibit in the relevant paragraph.

For example:

The medical records confirm that I developed severe symptoms two weeks before the examination and received emergency treatment three days afterwards. Please see Exhibit A2.

This approach is easier to follow than submitting dozens of pages without explanation.

How should a University of Leeds academic appeal be drafted?

An effective appeal needs a clear structure.

1. Identify the decision under appeal

State:

• The date of the decision.
• The programme.
• The module or assessment concerned.
• The formal outcome.
• How and when the University published it.

2. Identify the appeal ground

The student should clearly state which formal ground applies.

Do not write only that the procedure was unfair.

A clearer formulation might be:

This appeal relies on a material procedural irregularity and the University’s failure to give adequate consideration to previously submitted mitigating circumstances.

3. Give a concise factual background

A complex case may need a chronology.

However, irrelevant background should not overwhelm the main submission.

4. Explain the practical impact

The student should explain how the issue affected:

• An examination.
• A coursework assessment.
• A dissertation.
• A placement assessment.
• Programme progression.
• A final degree classification.
• A doctoral research or viva outcome.

5. Explain any late disclosure

Where the case concerns previously undisclosed mitigating circumstances, the appeal should use a separate heading for this issue.

The student must explain why they could not use the normal procedure at the proper time.

6. Identify the relevant regulation

A procedural-error case should refer to:

• The programme handbook.
• The module specification.
• Assessment regulations.
• Reasonable adjustment documents.
• The Academic Appeals Procedure.
• The mitigating circumstances policy.
• Research degree regulations.

7. Request an available remedy

The student should explain what action they want the University to take.

Possible requests may include:

• Reconsideration of the assessment decision.
• An additional assessment opportunity.
• Treatment of a resit as a first attempt.
• Reconvening a Board of Examiners.
• Reconsideration in light of accepted mitigating circumstances.
• Reconsideration of a research progress decision.
• A new thesis or viva process.

A request for the University simply to add a particular number of marks will not normally fit the academic appeal procedure.

How does the University of Leeds academic appeal procedure work?

Step 1: contact the School about the decision

The University encourages students to contact their School first to ensure that they understand the formal decision and academic feedback.

A taught student may contact the School’s Director of Student Education.

A postgraduate researcher may contact the Director of Postgraduate Research Studies.

However, students should not miss the 20-working-day deadline while waiting for an informal reply. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Step 2: submit the case through Case Creator

The University currently uses Case Creator to build and submit appeal cases.

The student must explain:

• Which decision they are challenging.
• Which appeal ground they rely on.
• The key facts.
• The supporting evidence.
• The outcome they seek.

Students who cannot log in or who need an accessible format may contact the Student Cases team. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Step 3: preliminary University review

The University will normally carry out a preliminary review within 10 working days of receiving the appeal.

The Head of Student Cases or a nominee may reject the case at this stage where:

• The matter falls outside the academic appeal procedure.
• The appeal is late.
• The student has not identified a valid ground.
• The evidence is insufficient.
• The appeal challenges only academic judgement.
• The requested outcome is not a remedy the University can provide.

Where the University rejects the case at the preliminary stage, it will normally issue reasons and a Completion of Procedures Letter. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Step 4: the School responds

If the appeal passes the preliminary review, the University will send it to the student’s School.

For a postgraduate researcher, the matter may go to the Graduate School or the School responsible for the research degree.

The School should respond to the central issues raised and provide relevant evidence or staff statements.

The normal deadline is 20 working days after the University asks the School to respond.

If the School provides no response within the period, the appeal may be upheld once the University’s investigator confirms the position. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Step 5: the student submits final comments

The Student Cases team will send the School’s response and attachments to the student.

The student will then normally have 10 working days to provide final comments.

The final comments should not simply repeat the original appeal.

Instead, they should address:

• Whether the School misunderstood the facts.
• Whether the School overlooked evidence.
• Whether the response relies on the wrong regulation.
• Whether the response introduces a new disputed issue.
• Whether the proposed remedy is adequate.
• Whether the response deals with the main appeal point.

This deadline is important.

If the student does not submit final comments on time, the University may treat the appeal as withdrawn. The original decision will remain in force. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Step 6: investigation panel review

After receiving the final comments, the Head of Student Cases will review the case again.

Where the School accepts that a problem occurred and offers an appropriate remedy, the University may confirm that remedy.

Otherwise, the appeal will normally go to an investigation panel of at least three people.

The panel may:

• Ask the student for further clarification.
• Ask the School for more information.
• Obtain internal or external advice.
• Confirm the remedy proposed by the School.
• Reject the case where it has no realistic prospect of success.
• Refer the matter to the Committee on Applications for a hearing.

The panel normally aims to decide the case within 10 working days after receiving all necessary material. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Step 7: Committee on Applications hearing

Some complex cases proceed to the Committee on Applications.

The hearing is inquisitorial rather than a court-style adversarial process.

The University will normally:

• Give at least 10 working days’ notice.
• Allow the student to attend.
• Allow the student to make a statement.
• Ask the student questions.
• Hear separately from the School’s representative.
• Apply the balance-of-probabilities standard.

The student may bring one supporter.

The supporter may be:

• An adviser from LUU Advice.
• A friend.
• A family member.
• Another suitable person.

However, the supporter cannot attend instead of the student and will not normally act as an advocate.

The supporter may consult with the student during the meeting. They may answer a question on the student’s behalf only where the Chair permits it. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

The Committee will normally issue a written decision within 10 working days after the hearing.

Step 8: final internal review

A student who does not accept the investigation panel’s proposed remedy, or who disagrees with the Committee on Applications outcome, may consider a final internal review.

The normal deadline is 10 working days after the outcome letter.

The student must rely on one or more of these grounds:

• The original decision was unreasonable on the evidence.
• The investigation panel or Committee procedure was defective and caused material disadvantage.
• Important new evidence has become available and the student has a good reason for not providing it earlier.

The student cannot rely only on disagreement with the outcome.

The Pro Vice-Chancellor for Student Education, or a nominee, will normally decide the review within 20 working days of receiving it.

Possible outcomes include:

• Upholding the original decision.
• Varying the original decision.
• Referring the case back to the investigation panel or Committee for reconsideration.

After this stage, the University will normally issue a Completion of Procedures Letter. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Can a solicitor represent a student?

The University expects the student to submit and manage their own academic appeal.

The student cannot transfer full responsibility for the case to a third party.

The University will discuss the case with a third party only after receiving the student’s written consent. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

At a Committee on Applications hearing, the student may bring a supporter.

A solicitor can still provide substantial preparation before the hearing, including:

• Assessing the merits.
• Drafting the appeal.
• Organising the evidence.
• Reviewing the School’s response.
• Drafting the final comments.
• Preparing the student’s statement.
• Practising likely Committee questions.
• Identifying procedural errors.
• Drafting the final review request.

However, even where a legally qualified person attends, they will not normally act as a formal advocate in place of the student.

The student will remain responsible for answering factual questions. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Does the original decision pause during the appeal?

Usually not.

The decision of the Board of Examiners or another academic body will remain in effect unless the appeal overturns it.

Therefore, students should not assume that:

• A withdrawal decision has been suspended.
• They can continue to the next stage.
• A resit has been cancelled.
• A degree classification has not taken effect.
• Registration has automatically resumed.
• Student visa sponsorship will remain unaffected.

There is an important exception for postgraduate researchers.

Where a postgraduate researcher appeals a thesis referral or a transfer to MPhil registration, the University will normally suspend the research registration during the appeal so that the student does not lose research time. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

International students should also obtain qualified immigration advice promptly. Withdrawal, suspension, transfer to MPhil or a thesis referral may affect Student visa sponsorship. (students.leeds.ac.uk)

Can a student attend graduation while an appeal is pending?

From July 2026, the University allows a student with an unresolved academic appeal to attend their originally scheduled graduation ceremony.

The student will graduate with the degree and classification shown in the current formal result.

If the appeal later changes the award or classification, the University will issue an updated certificate and transcript.

The student may also choose to defer attendance and attend a later ceremony after the appeal has concluded. (students.leeds.ac.uk)

Postgraduate research academic appeals

The general Academic Appeals Procedure also applies to postgraduate researchers.

A research student may appeal:

• Termination of the research degree.
• Required withdrawal.
• Transfer to MPhil registration.
• A research progress assessment.
• A requirement to revise and resubmit the thesis.
• A doctoral examination outcome.
• The research degree awarded.
• Refusal of a suspension.
• Refusal of an extension.
• Inadequate supervision.

Research cases will often require a detailed chronology.

Students should organise:

• Research progress reports.
• Supervision meeting records.
• Annual Progress Review material.
• Transfer assessment documents.
• Thesis and viva documents.
• Emails with supervisors.
• Graduate School decisions.
• Suspension or extension applications.
• Medical evidence.
• Research degree regulations.

The normal deadline remains 20 working days after the University publishes the formal decision. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Academic appeal or student complaint?

An academic appeal and a student complaint serve different purposes.

A University of Leeds academic appeal mainly challenges a formal academic decision.

A student complaint concerns a service, action or failure by the University.

A complaint may involve:

• Inadequate teaching arrangements.
• Programme design concerns.
• Insufficient facilities or resources.
• The quality of supervision.
• Failure to provide a promised service.
• Administrative problems.
• Communication delays.
• Bullying, harassment or retaliation.
• Another issue affecting the student experience.

A student cannot use the complaints procedure to challenge an examination result or academic judgement directly.

However, a student may complain about the administrative handling of an assessment or academic appeal process. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Can an appeal and complaint run at the same time?

Where the complaint and appeal concern the same issue, or the matters substantially overlap, the University will not normally allow both procedures to run at the same time.

The student may be unable to start an appeal until the complaint has concluded or been permanently withdrawn.

However, the academic appeal deadline may continue to run unless the Student Cases team agrees otherwise in advance.

Students should therefore choose the procedure carefully. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

University of Leeds student complaints procedure

Stage One: local resolution

Students should normally raise the concern first with:

• The relevant member of staff.
• Their personal tutor.
• The programme leader.
• The Head of School.
• The relevant service.

Where the student asks for a written local response, the Head of School, Head of Service or a nominee will normally respond within 15 working days. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Stage Two: central formal complaint

Where local resolution fails, or the student cannot reasonably address the issue at School level, they may submit a formal complaint to the University’s complaints team.

The University also provides Case Creator for building and submitting complaints.

A formal complaint should normally include:

• The student’s name and ID number.
• The programme and School.
• The central complaint issues.
• The local steps already taken.
• Relevant dates.
• Supporting evidence.
• The outcome sought.

The University will normally acknowledge the complaint within five working days and aims to provide a formal response within 20 working days.

Complex cases may take longer. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Student complaint deadline

For a currently registered student, the procedure does not set a completely fixed deadline.

However, the University will not normally consider a complaint made more than 12 months after the relevant event.

A student who has withdrawn or graduated should generally begin the procedure within three months of leaving the University. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Final complaint review

A student who disagrees with the central complaint outcome may request a final review within 20 working days.

The available grounds include:

• A defect in the complaints procedure that caused material disadvantage.
• Important new information that could not reasonably have been obtained earlier.
• An unreasonable judgement by the complaints officer on the evidence.

The Pro Vice-Chancellor for Student Education, or a nominee, will normally aim to decide the review within one calendar month.

The final decision will normally include a Completion of Procedures Letter. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Can a solicitor handle a student complaint?

A student may identify a supporter.

However, the University expects the student to manage the complaint personally. The student cannot hand full responsibility to a parent, solicitor or another third party.

The University may copy a supporter into correspondence, but the student will remain responsible for the main decisions and responses. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

A solicitor can still provide assistance outside the procedure, including:

• Case assessment.
• Complaint drafting.
• Evidence organisation.
• Outcome analysis.
• Final review drafting.
• OIA complaint preparation.

University of Leeds academic misconduct procedure

Academic misconduct cases follow a separate procedure.

The current 2025/26 procedure applies to undergraduates, taught postgraduates and the taught components of research degrees.

The University may investigate:

• Examination cheating.
• Plagiarism.
• Reuse of the student’s own previous work.
• Theft of work.
• Collusion.
• Fabrication of assessment content.
• Falsification of supporting evidence.
• Contract cheating.
• Unauthorised use of generative AI.
• Improper use of translation software.
• Assisting another student to cheat.

The University defines academic misconduct as an attempt to gain an unfair advantage in assessment. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Plagiarism allegations

Plagiarism means presenting another person’s work, in whole or in part, as the student’s own.

“Work” may include more than written words. It may also include:

• Data.
• Images.
• Sound.
• Performance.
• Code.
• Research.
• Arguments and structure.

When responding to a plagiarism allegation, the student should examine:

• Where the similar material came from.
• Whether the sources were acknowledged properly.
• Whether note-taking errors occurred.
• How the work developed.
• Whether the Turnitin material has been interpreted accurately.
• Which passages are genuinely in dispute.
• Whether the material came from a permitted common source.

A general denial will rarely answer specific evidence. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Collusion allegations

Collusion involves unauthorised cooperation with another person on an assessment that should have been completed independently.

It may include:

• Writing for another student.
• Editing another student’s work.
• Giving detailed editorial advice.
• Sharing answers.
• Providing examples that another student can insert into an assessment.
• Helping another student to copy.
• Submitting work for another student.

However, not every discussion between students amounts to collusion.

The response should compare the actual communications with the level of cooperation allowed by the assessment rules. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Contract cheating allegations

Contract cheating includes submitting work obtained from a third party.

The third party may be inside or outside the University. The assistance may be paid or unpaid.

An allegation may involve:

• Buying an essay.
• Commissioning another person to write.
• Using an essay-writing website.
• Asking a friend to complete the assessment.
• Using a paid online tutor to rewrite work.
• Obtaining answers from an assignment website that can be submitted directly.

Students should retain payment records, communications, drafts, research notes and version histories so that they can respond accurately to the University’s evidence. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

AI and ChatGPT allegations

The University treats the unauthorised use of generative AI or translation software to create or amend assessed work as potential academic misconduct.

For taught assessments, the University uses red, amber and green categories:

• Red category: generative AI use is not permitted.
• Amber category: AI may be used in a supporting way, subject to the tutor’s and assessment instructions.
• Green category: AI forms part of the assessment and should be used as instructed.

Even where AI is permitted, the student will normally need to acknowledge the use honestly.

The University also advises students to retain the output produced by AI tools because it may ask to see that material during assessment or an academic misconduct investigation. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

What evidence should be preserved in an AI case?

Students should retain:

• Early outlines.
• Handwritten or electronic research notes.
• Word version history.
• Google Docs version history.
• Cloud timestamps.
• Drafts.
• Raw data.
• Reference materials.
• Reference-management records.
• AI prompts.
• AI-generated output.
• Changes made by the student to AI-generated material.
• AI guidance issued by the tutor.
• The assessment instructions.
• Earlier work showing a consistent writing style.

Students should not delete, rename or alter original records after receiving an allegation.

They should also not create false drafts or fabricate version histories. Falsifying supporting evidence may itself create a separate and serious misconduct issue. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Stage One: School-level investigation

The School will first assemble the allegation and evidence.

The student should normally receive at least three working days’ written notice.

The notice should identify:

• The specific allegation.
• The work concerned.
• The evidence relied on by the School.
• Whether a technological detection tool was used.
• A marked-up copy of the work in a plagiarism case.
• The investigation meeting date.

The meeting gives the student an opportunity to explain how they produced the work.

The School applies the balance-of-probabilities standard. It asks whether the alleged event was more likely to have happened than not. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Can the student bring a supporter?

The student may bring one supporter of their choice.

However, the supporter cannot:

• Attend instead of the student.
• Act as a formal advocate.
• Manage all communication for the student.
• Attend alone where the student is absent.

The student must explain how the work was produced and answer the questions personally. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

School investigation outcome

Where the School finds that the allegation is not proven, it should normally notify the student in writing within 10 working days of the meeting.

Where the School finds academic misconduct, it should also normally explain within 10 working days:

• Which allegation was proven.
• The penalty.
• The reasons for the penalty.
• The investigation meeting record.
• Whether the matter will proceed to the Committee on Applications.

Mitigating circumstances may affect the level of penalty. However, they do not remove an established finding of academic misconduct. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Review of a School-level penalty

A student must normally request a review within 10 working days of the School’s decision.

The grounds include:

• The School’s decision was unreasonable on the evidence.
• The School investigation procedure was defective and caused material disadvantage.
• Important new evidence has become available and there is a good reason why it was not provided earlier.

Disagreement with the penalty alone is not a review ground.

The Committee on Applications will not normally repeat the whole investigation. Instead, it will consider whether the School followed the correct procedure and whether the penalty was reasonable and available under the rules. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Committee on Applications academic misconduct hearing

Examination cheating, some serious cases, repeat cases and cases requiring a penalty beyond the School’s powers may proceed to the Committee on Applications.

After receiving the referral notice, the student will normally have 10 working days to state whether they admit the allegation and to provide a defence or mitigation statement.

The student should submit all material they want the Committee to consider at this stage.

Unless there is a good reason, the Committee may refuse evidence introduced later. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

The Committee will:

• Give the student an opportunity to attend.
• Allow one supporter.
• Ask the student questions.
• Review the University’s evidence.
• Apply the balance-of-probabilities standard.
• Decide whether the allegation is proven.
• Decide the penalty where the allegation is proven.

The University will normally issue the written outcome within 10 working days after the Committee meeting. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Final academic misconduct review

A student must normally request a final review within 10 working days of the Committee on Applications outcome.

The grounds include:

• The Committee’s decision was unreasonable on the evidence.
• The Committee procedure was defective and caused material disadvantage.
• Important new evidence has become available.

A senior officer responsible for student education and experience, or a nominee, will normally decide the review within 20 working days.

The final outcome may:

• Uphold the original decision.
• Vary the decision.
• Refer the matter back to the Committee for reconsideration.

Where appropriate, the University will issue a Completion of Procedures Letter at the end of the process. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

What penalties can academic misconduct attract?

The University does not prescribe one automatic penalty for every form of misconduct.

The School and Committee on Applications should make a fair and proportionate decision based on the individual case.

Possible outcomes include:

• A written warning.
• Disregarding the part affected by misconduct.
• A mark of zero for the assessment.
• Reassessment.
• A capped reassessment mark.
• A capped module mark.
• Repeating credits or an academic year.
• Reduction of credits.
• A lower degree classification.
• A lower exit award.
• Exclusion with an intermediate award.
• Exclusion without an award.

Where a student must complete a new assessment to remove the misconduct, they may be unable to receive credits, a final result or graduate until the replacement assessment is complete. (secretariat.leeds.ac.uk)

Postgraduate research academic misconduct

The non-taught components of postgraduate research degrees follow a separate procedure.

That procedure may cover:

• A transfer report.
• An MPhil-to-PhD assessment.
• A doctoral thesis.
• A viva.
• Plagiarism.
• Viva misconduct.
• Unauthorised use of generative AI.
• Failure to disclose AI or third-party proofreading.
• Other misconduct involving research material.

A postgraduate researcher will also normally have only 10 working days to request the relevant review after a School or Committee outcome.

Possible outcomes may include:

• A written warning.
• Examination after removal of affected sections.
• Revision and resubmission.
• A further viva.
• Referral to the Committee on Applications.
• Another outcome affecting the research degree. (students.leeds.ac.uk)

What happens after the internal procedure ends?

After the final internal stage, the University will normally issue a Completion of Procedures Letter.

An eligible student may then complain to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education, commonly known as the OIA.

The OIA must normally receive the complete complaint within 12 months of the final University decision or Completion of Procedures Letter. (oiahe.org.uk)

The OIA may review issues involving:

• Academic appeals.
• Academic misconduct.
• Mitigating circumstances.
• Procedural errors.
• Supervision.
• Student complaints.
• Placements and fitness to practise.
• Whether the University acted fairly and reasonably.

However, the OIA does not act as another marking body. It cannot simply replace the academic judgement of the University’s examiners with its own. (oiahe.org.uk)

How Ginkgo Advisory can assist with a University of Leeds academic appeal

Initial case assessment

We review:

• The formal decision.
• The publication date.
• The 20-working-day deadline.
• The applicable grounds.
• The available evidence.
• The outcome sought.

We then identify whether the matter is more suitable for:

• An academic appeal.
• A mitigating circumstances application.
• A student complaint.
• An academic misconduct response.
• A misconduct outcome review.
• A postgraduate research appeal.
• An OIA complaint.

Analysis of appeal grounds

We compare the facts with the University’s formal grounds.

The analysis may address:

• Whether the student had a good reason for late disclosure.
• Whether the University properly considered previously submitted circumstances.
• Whether the assessment was unfair.
• Whether bias existed.
• Whether a procedural error was material.
• Whether supervision problems affected a formal academic decision.
• Whether refusal of a suspension or extension was unreasonable.

Evidence review

We analyse:

• Whether the medical evidence covers the correct period.
• Whether the documents explain the academic impact.
• Whether emails support the chronology.
• Whether the University overlooked relevant material.
• Whether a formal translation is required.
• Whether statements contradict each other.
• Which documents should be included.
• Which documents may weaken the case.

Drafting

We can prepare or review:

• A Case Creator academic appeal.
• An appeal involving mitigating circumstances.
• A material procedural irregularity appeal.
• An unfair assessment or bias appeal.
• An inadequate supervision appeal.
• A postgraduate research appeal.
• A late-appeal explanation.
• Final comments after the School’s response.
• A student statement for the Committee on Applications.
• A final internal review request.
• A student complaint.
• A final complaint review.
• An academic misconduct response.
• An AI or ChatGPT allegation response.
• A review of a School-level penalty.
• A review of a Committee outcome.
• An OIA complaint.
• Evidence schedules and chronologies.

Meeting and hearing preparation

We can prepare students for:

• An academic appeal hearing before the Committee on Applications.
• A School academic misconduct investigation meeting.
• A Committee on Applications misconduct hearing.
• A postgraduate research misconduct meeting.
• A student complaint meeting.
• Another University interview or panel.

Preparation may include:

• Likely questions.
• Difficult evidence.
• Oral answers.
• The factual chronology.
• An opening statement.
• Procedural strategy.
• An available and realistic remedy.

Representation where permitted

Whether an external representative may attend depends on the specific procedure and the Chair’s decision.

The University generally expects the student to handle the case personally.

Even where a solicitor cannot act as a formal advocate, solicitor-led written preparation and hearing strategy can still provide substantial assistance.

Common mistakes in University of Leeds academic appeals

Arguing only that the mark is too low

Academic judgement does not, by itself, create a valid appeal.

The student must identify a factual or procedural ground recognised by the University.

Missing the 20-working-day deadline

Informal communication does not automatically stop the deadline.

Students should prepare the formal appeal while contacting the School for clarification.

Appealing a provisional mark

The student should first confirm that the Board of Examiners has approved the result.

Failing to explain late disclosure

A medical condition does not automatically explain why the student failed to submit mitigating circumstances on time.

Providing only a diagnosis

The evidence should also address timing, severity and the impact on the particular assessment.

Failing to submit final comments on time

If the student does not respond to the School’s material within 10 working days, the University may treat the appeal as withdrawn.

Running a related complaint and appeal at the same time

The University may not allow two overlapping procedures to continue together.

More importantly, the academic appeal deadline may still run.

Submitting evidence without dates or sources

Screenshots, emails and chat records should show their original dates and times.

Using a covert recording

The University will not accept a secret recording as supporting evidence. The recording may also create separate conduct concerns.

Asking the University simply to add marks

A more realistic remedy usually involves reconsideration, reassessment or correction of the procedure.

Attending a misconduct meeting without preparation

An early explanation may affect the entire case.

Deleting AI records

Version history, AI output and drafts may support the student’s authorship.

Assuming a solicitor can automatically speak for the student

The University will normally treat a solicitor or another person as a supporter rather than an advocate replacing the student.

Frequently asked questions

What is the University of Leeds academic appeal deadline?

The normal deadline is 20 working days after publication of the formal decision.

The day on which the University publishes the decision does not count, but the final submission day does.

Can I appeal a provisional mark?

Usually not.

Students will normally need to wait until the relevant Board of Examiners formally confirms the result.

Can I appeal because I disagree with my mark?

Not on that basis alone.

The student must establish mitigating circumstances, a procedural error, unfair assessment, bias, inadequate supervision or another recognised ground.

What if I did not submit mitigating circumstances on time?

An appeal may still be possible.

However, the student must show that circumstances outside their control prevented earlier disclosure.

Is personal embarrassment a good reason for late disclosure?

Usually not.

The University expressly states that personal embarrassment or reluctance to disclose private matters will not normally amount to a good reason.

Can I submit evidence later?

Current online guidance allows students to provide key supporting material within two weeks of creating the Case Creator case.

However, it is better to provide the complete evidence with the first submission where possible.

How long does an academic appeal take?

The University states that the procedure may take up to three months.

Complex cases may take longer.

Does the original decision pause during the appeal?

Usually not.

The student should continue to comply with the current progression, withdrawal, reassessment or registration decision.

Can I attend graduation while my appeal is pending?

From July 2026, a student may attend the originally scheduled graduation ceremony while the appeal remains unresolved.

If the appeal later changes the result, the University will update the certificate and transcript.

Can a solicitor draft a University of Leeds academic appeal?

Yes.

A solicitor can assess the grounds, review the evidence, draft the appeal and prepare the student for a hearing.

Can a solicitor speak for me at the Committee on Applications?

Not automatically.

The supporter’s principal role is to accompany and advise the student.

Can a PhD student appeal a thesis or viva outcome?

Yes, but the appeal must rely on a ground recognised by the Academic Appeals Procedure.

Disagreement with the examiners’ academic judgement alone will not normally be sufficient.

Can I complain about inadequate supervision?

A student complaint may be appropriate.

Where the supervision problem has affected a formal thesis, progress or degree decision, it may also become relevant to an academic appeal.

Can I defend a ChatGPT allegation?

Yes.

The student should identify whether the assessment was red, amber or green and preserve drafts, version histories, AI output and research records.

What is the academic misconduct review deadline?

The review deadline for both School-level outcomes and Committee on Applications outcomes is normally 10 working days.

Where can I complain after completing the University process?

An eligible student may complain to the OIA.

The normal deadline is 12 months from the Completion of Procedures Letter.

Request a confidential case assessment

A University of Leeds academic appeal may affect progression, reassessment, graduation, degree classification, professional training, doctoral research and future study.

Early professional advice can help the student identify the correct procedure, protect the deadline and organise the evidence.

Ginkgo Advisory provides solicitor-led academic appeals, student complaints and academic misconduct defence.

Our support is confidential, independent and tailored to the individual case.

Assistance can begin with an initial assessment and continue through to the final written submission. Where the relevant procedure permits it, we can also provide representation.

Contact Ginkgo Advisory for a confidential assessment of your University of Leeds academic appeal, student complaint, plagiarism allegation or AI academic misconduct case.

Independent-service disclaimer

Ginkgo Advisory is independent from the University of Leeds, Leeds University Union and the Office of the Independent Adjudicator.

This article provides general information only.

It does not guarantee an outcome and does not replace professional advice based on the facts of an individual case.

University rules and procedures may change. Students should also check the latest official webpages, programme handbook, assessment instructions and decision letter.