1.       Interpretation

          In these rules, unless any contrary intention appears:

          (a)           the “Committee” means the Doctoral Committee of the Academic Board;

          (b)           “school” means school in the University of New England;

          (c)           “course” means the program of advanced level course work and thesis;

          (d)           “candidature” includes probationary candidature;

          (e)           “unit” is interpreted as a period of study in a subject and is a component of a course.

2.       Admission to Candidature

2.1.         On the recommendation of the relevant head of school, the Committee may admit to candidature for the degree an applicant who has at least three years’ relevant work experience and who:

               (a)    holds or has fulfilled all the requirements for:

(i)      a degree of Master of Laws from The University of New England provided that, in the opinion of the committee, the applicant has shown potential to undertake the course work and research required for the award;

(ii)     a degree of Bachelor of Laws or Juris Doctor, with first class or division 2 A honours of The University of New England provided that, in the opinion of the committee, the applicant has shown potential to undertake the course work and research required for the award; or

               (b)    holds, from another institution, qualifications which in the opinion of the Committee are equivalent to those prescribed in Rule 2.1.(a).

2.2.         In exceptional circumstances the Committee may, on the recommendation of the relevant head of school, admit to candidature a graduate who does not satisfy the requirements of Rule 2.1. if evidence of acceptable suitability for candidature is produced.

2.3.         Every applicant for admission to candidature shall submit to the Committee a proposed program of advanced study, and research to be undertaken in a nominated school of the University and approved.

3.       Supervision

3.1.         The degree of Doctor of Judicial Science is a supervised degree and the supervisors shall have a general advisory role during the course work portion of the degree; and the candidate’s research and preparation of the thesis must be carried out under the supervision of the member or members of the University staff appointed by the committee on the recommendation of the relevant head of school. Except under exceptional circumstances, the head of school shall nominate a minimum of two supervisors for each applicant. One supervisor shall be nominated as principal supervisor and the remaining as co-supervisor(s).

3.2.         The Committee, on the recommendation of the relevant head of school, may appoint an additional supervisor or supervisors; such a supervisor may be an Emeritus Professor, an Honorary Fellow or an Associate of the University.

3.3.         The Committee, on the recommendation of the relevant head of school, may replace a supervisor at any time.

3.4.         The supervisor is, in large a measure, responsible for ensuring that the high standard of the degree is maintained. The supervisor shall carry out the responsibilities in accordance with the following rules:

               (a)    the supervisor, in consultation with the relevant head of school, shall ensure the research topic chosen by the candidate is at an appropriate academic level and is likely, if successfully completed, to be worthy of publication;

               (b)    the supervisor shall advise the candidate on the quality of drafts of the thesis, but the thesis finally presented shall be substantially the independent work of the candidate;

               (c)    the principal supervisor shall receive from the candidate progress reports required in terms of Rule 6.1. and shall forward these, together with a comment from the relevant head of school, to the Committee with his or her assessment, in a form prescribed by the Committee, of the candidate’s progress;

               (d)    if the principal supervisor or the head of school is of the opinion that the candidate is not making satisfactory progress, the supervisor or the head of school shall recommend to the Committee that the candidate be invited to show cause why the candidature should not be terminated.

4.       Period of Candidature

4.1.         Except as provided in Rules 4.3. and 8.4., the normal maximum period of candidature shall be three years for a full-time candidate and six years for a part-time candidate.

4.2.         Where the committee permits a candidate to transfer from full-time to part-time status, or vice versa, the minimum period of candidature shall be adjusted pro rata.

4.3.         The committee, on the advice of the supervisor, may grant suspension of candidature where the candidate can demonstrate compelling circumstances which prevent the candidate from pursuing work toward the award. The committee shall not grant suspension of candidature for a period or periods totalling more than one year.

5.       Conditions of Candidature

5.1.         The committee upon examining the candidate’s first two six monthly reports shall:

               (a)    confirm the candidature; or

               (b)    terminate the candidature.

5.2.         (a)    The candidate may pursue the award either internally or externally.

               (b)    In exceptional circumstances the attendance requirements noted in Rule 5.2.(a) may be varied by the committee on the recommendation of the relevant head of school and the supervisor.

5.3.         In addition to any course work units prescribed in Rule 10., a candidate may be required by the supervisor to attend lectures and seminars, to present seminars and to perform practical work.

5.4.         No candidate may enrol in, or remain enrolled in, any other course or unit either at the University or at any other institution without the consent of the supervisor and the approval of the committee.

5.5.         A candidate shall give at least three months’ notice to the supervisor and the committee of the anticipated date of thesis submission.

5.6.         Initially, a candidate shall enrol as a student of the University by a date to be specified by the committee and, thereafter in each calendar year, by a date to be specified by the committee.

6.       Progress Report

6.1.         Each year a six monthly and annual report is to be submitted by the candidate. The supervisor and the relevant head of school shall comment on the candidate’s report on progress before that report is considered by the Executive Dean and forwarded to the committee.

6.2.         Following review of the progress report, the committee may continue the candidature or consider termination of the candidature under the conditions of Rule 7.3. The committee may seek clarification or advice from the candidate, the supervisor or the relevant head of school prior to deciding whether to continue candidature or consider termination of candidature.

7.       Withdrawals; Termination of Candidature

7.1.         (a)    A candidate may withdraw from candidature by writing to the secretary of the committee.

               (b)    A candidate may not withdraw from candidature after submission of the thesis except that a candidate, who has been invited to revise the thesis in terms of Rule 14.6.(e) and who does not accept that invitation, shall be deemed to have withdrawn from candidature.,

7.2.         On the recommendation of the relevant head of school the committee may readmit to candidature a person who has withdrawn. The committee shall decide what part, if any, of the candidature completed prior to the withdrawal shall be counted towards the new period of candidature.

7.3.         In the event:

               (a)    that a supervisor reports a candidate’s progress to be unsatisfactory; or

               (b)    of the candidate’s failure to complete prescribed course work at a standard determined by the committee; or

               (c)    of the candidate’s failure to comply with any other provisions of these rules; the candidature shall be terminated by the committee unless it determines otherwise on the basis of written or other evidence placed before it. Before candidature may be terminated in terms of this rule the candidate shall be invited to show cause, by a date to be determined by the committee, why candidature should not be terminated.

8.       Advanced Standing

8.1.         Advanced standing may be granted, by the committee on the recommendation of the supervisor and the relevant head of school, for units passed at a university, provided that those units:

               (a)    are of equivalent standard to units available for the SJD program; and

               (b)    are appropriate to the candidate’s SJD program.

8.2.         Only under exceptional circumstances shall advanced standing be granted for the advanced research methodology unit (LLM 600).

8.3.         Advanced standing may be granted for units passed elsewhere after admission to candidature provided that the candidate has previously obtained the permission of the committee to enrol in such units.

8.4.         Where advanced standing is granted, the candidate’s period of candidature shall be reduced proportionately.

9.       Course Requirements

          A candidate for the degree shall pursue a course consisting of advanced course work, consisting of the core unit LLM 600 and four elective units from the LLM program, and the thesis approved by the committee.

10.     Course work

10.1.       A candidate will be required to complete a program of advanced level course work approved by the committee on the recommendation of the supervisor and the relevant head of school. Normally, the advanced level course work will comprise five units consisting of the core unit LLM 600 and four elective units from the LLM program, excluding LLM 619, 620, 621, 622.

10.2.       Candidates will be required to achieve in the course work units an examination grade specified by the committee.

10.3.       In respect of any prescribed course work the candidate shall be subject to the rules of the faculty in which the units are taken.

10.4.       The examination grade of each course work unit shall be recorded on the candidate’s official transcript of academic record.

11.     Research Proposal

11.1.       Within six months after initial enrolment in the thesis, the candidate, following consultation with the supervisor, shall present a research proposal to the head of the relevant school. The candidate may be required to participate in a thorough review of the research proposal involving a seminar or other appropriate means. Once the research proposal is considered by the relevant head of school to be satisfactory, a précis of the research proposal shall be reported to the Committee.

11.2.       If, within nine months after initial enrolment in the thesis, the candidate has not submitted a research proposal considered satisfactory by the head of the relevant school, the supervisor and the relevant head of school shall present a report on the candidate’s progress to the Committee. In the event that unsatisfactory progress is reported, the Committee shall invite the candidate to show cause why candidature should not be terminated.

12.     Thesis

12.1.       On completion of the program of study and research comprising SJD700, a candidate shall present for examination a thesis embodying the results of the candidate’s research which shall be substantially an original contribution to the study of law. The thesis must clearly reflect the application of intellectual skills to a problem of practice in law.

12.2.       The thesis, exclusive of any appendices, shall not exceed 70 000 words.

12.3.       The thesis shall be written in English.

12.4.       (a)    A candidate shall state generally in the preface of the thesis and specifically in notes, the sources from which the information is derived, the extent to which he or she has made use of the work ‘of others and the portion of work which is claimed as original.

               (b)    A candidate may not present as the thesis any work which has been submitted for examination for any award at this University or another institution, but will not be precluded from incorporating such work in the thesis, provided that, in presenting the thesis for examination, the candidate indicates the part of the work which has been so incorporated.

12.5.       On the recommendation of the supervisor, the committee may allow a candidate to submit with the thesis supporting material such as audio tapes, video tapes and computer discs. In special circumstances, with the permission of the committee on the recommendation of the principal supervisor, the thesis may be presented, at least in part, in a multi-media format.

12.6.       The candidate shall submit to the PhD office four copies of the thesis, three of which shall be soft bound in a form approved by the committee and one copy of which shall be unbound for eventual deposit in the Dixson Library. Each copy shall contain:

               (a)    an abstract of the thesis; and

               (b)    a statement, signed by the candidate, certifying that the substance of the thesis has not been nor is currently being submitted for any other degree or award and that, to the best of his or her knowledge, all help received in preparing the thesis and all sources used have been acknowledged in the thesis.

12.7.       (a)    At the time the thesis is submitted, the supervisor shall send to the committee a certificate stating:

(i)      that the principal supervisor an cosupervisor have discussed with the candidate the academic content of the thesis in its final form and that, while neither expressing nor implying a judgement about the merit of the work, in the supervisor’s opinion it is ready for submission for examination for the degree;

(ii)     that all requirements of the school, in regard to the deposition of museum material, or any other supporting material have been met; and

(iii)    that the physical form and presentation of the thesis are appropriate to the discipline.

               (b)    Should the supervisor be unwilling to provide a certificate in these terms, the supervisor shall so advise the candidate and shall send to the committee a written statement setting out the grounds on which the certificate is withheld.

12.8.       The certificate referred to in Rule 12.7. shall be received before a thesis is accepted for examination. When, for any reason, the certificate is withheld, the committee may decline to accept the thesis for examination or may accept it following such consultation or under such additional conditions as the committee may deem to be appropriate for specific cases.

13.     Thesis Examination Process

(i)            On receiving a thesis the Committee, on the recommendation of the principal supervisor and Head of the School, shall appoint three examiners at least two of whom shall be external to The University of New England plus one reserve examiner. A pool of at least five potential examiners from which the three plus reserve are selected must have been assembled through consultation between the principal supervisor, the candidate and all current co-supervisors. The candidate will not be given any indication of the final set of examiners that have been appointed. The Head of School, or principal supervisor as appropriate, will be expected to obtain written or email consent, from each examiner excepting the reserve, to examine the thesis within two months of its receipt. In cases where a thesis has been permitted to exceed the normal 70 000 word limit, examiners shall be informed of this fact so they may consider it when making their decision to examine.

(ii)           If an additional examiner/adjudicator is required during the examination process, the choice will be made from the original pool of examiners, unless otherwise instructed by the Committee.

(iii)          No person who has been a principal supervisor or co-supervisor of the candidate shall be appointed as an examiner. No person who is currently or has ever been in a personal relationship with the candidate or any current supervisor will be approved as an examiner.

(iv)          Each examiner shall make a separate written report on the merits of the thesis but thereafter may be required to consult with the other examiners and report to the Committee. Each examiner will be reminded to provide his or her report within two months of receipt of the thesis. However, if an examiner fails to provide his or her report, after appropriate reminders, within a maximum of three months, the Committee, after consultation with the relevant Head of School, may notify the examiner that his or her services are no longer required and the reserve examiner may then be activated as a replacement.

14.     Thesis Examination Outcomes

(i)            Taking into account the recommendations of the examiners, the Committee may:

               (a)    recommend that the degree be awarded;

               (b)    recommend that the degree be awarded conditional upon the making of such amendments as the Committee deems appropriate;

               (c)    request the examiners to consult and report to the Committee;

               (d)    appoint an additional examiner or examiners;

               (e)    appoint an external adjudicator who shall consider and report to the Committee upon the thesis and any supporting papers invited or requested by the Committee and the reports of the examiners;

               (f)     require the candidate to sit for such written, oral or practical examinations as the Committee may prescribe;

               (g)    permit a candidate to revise the thesis for re-examination if, in the opinion of the Committee the work is of sufficient merit to warrant this concession;

               (h)    recommend that the degree be not awarded.

(ii)           A candidate awarded the degree in terms of Rule 14.(i)(b) shall complete the amendments within a period of time as the Committee shall prescribe and the Committee shall determine if the amendments will be made to the satisfaction of the principal supervisor, the relevant Head of School, or both.

(iii)          A candidate permitted to revise a thesis in terms of Rule 14.(i)(g) shall complete the revision within a period of time and under such conditions as the Committee shall prescribe and under the supervision of a principal supervisor or supervisors appointed by the Committee.

(iv)          A candidate who has revised a thesis in terms of Rule 14.(i)(g) and who fails the re-examination shall not be eligible for any further examination.

(v)           An external adjudicator will only be appointed by the Committee if the three examiners are unable to come to a consensus recommendation. If the adjudicator recommends that the candidate’s thesis be revised and resubmitted, then the adjudicator will serve as the sole examiner for the resubmitted thesis.

15.     Process Upon Recommendation of “Degree Not Be Awarded”

(i)            Where in view of the substance aspects of the examiners’ reports, the Committee intends to make the unfavourable recommendation described in Rule 14.(i)(h), the candidate and principal supervisor will be given an opportunity to separately respond to the examiners’ comments. In such cases the candidate and principal supervisor shall be allowed a maximum of eight weeks from the date of the letter of notification by which to submit a response. The Committee will refer any such responses to the examiners for written comment and final recommendation back to the Committee.

(ii)           If the thesis is sent to new examiners, to an adjudicator or into a consultation process, the candidate will be invited at each stage to reply to resulting comments leading toward a recommendation which the Committee determines will be unfavourable to the candidate. Candidate responses will be considered by the relevant examiner(s) or adjudicator at the appropriate stage whereupon a final recommendation will be forwarded to the Committee. At all stages, the candidate must confine his or her comments to matters of academic and substantive concern in his or her thesis.

(iii)          The Committee will consider all information so gathered in reaching its final determination. The final determination will either be to:

               (a)    recommend that the candidate not be awarded the degree; or

               (b)    recommend that the candidate be awarded an appropriate master’s degree.

16.     Appeals Against a Recommendation of “Degree Not Be Awarded”

(i)            Candidates have the right of appeal against an unfavourable examination outcome described in Rule 14.(i)(h) and will be invited to submit a report detailing any concerns they may have about the examination process before the Standing Committee makes its decision. The formal appeal must be made in writing to the Chair of the Academic Board within four weeks of receiving the advice of the unfavourable outcome. The formal appeal, recommendation, all examiners’ reports, candidate responses and any other relevant material shall then be referred to the Standing Committee of the Academic Board for review and final decision.

(ii)           Appeals will be permitted on procedural grounds only. Procedural grounds for appeal may include:

               (a)    procedural irregularities in the conduct of the examination;

               (b)    documentable evidence of prejudice or bias on the part of one or more examiners.

(iii)          Standing Committee will not consider any appeal where the candidate simply rejects the academic assessments of his or her work or where the candidate complains about inadequacy of supervision or other problems arising during the course of the candidate’s PhD program (problems encountered during candidature should be handled by grievance procedures at the appropriate time).

(iv)          Any member of the Standing Committee involved in making the recommendations in Rule 14.(i)(h) from the Research Doctoral Committee will absent themselves from all discussions of the appeal. If the Standing Committee sends a formal recommendation of fail, thereby upholding the procedural fairness of the Research Doctoral Committee’s recommendation, to the Academic Board, these same individuals shall absent themselves from the Board meeting during discussion of the recommendation. There shall be no appeal against the final decision of the Standing Committee.

17.     Access to Theses

17.1.       Under the Copyright Act 1968, as amended by the Copyright Amendment Act 1980, Section 51, subsection (2) the Librarian of the Dixson Library, has the right to copy theses under the conditions set out in that provision.

17.2.       However, the University has the right to restrict access to theses held by the Dixson Library and is prepared to allow the author of a thesis to restrict access to the thesis for certain purposes. The options open to a candidate who submits a thesis are set out in the “Right of Access to Thesis” for which all candidates for the degree of Doctor of Judicial Science are required to complete at the time of submitting the thesis . The following rules apply to all theses submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Judicial Science.

               (a)    A candidate who submits a thesis shall complete the form referred to in this rule stating the restrictions, if any, that he or she wishes placed on access to the thesis. A copy of the completed form shall be placed in each copy of the thesis held by the University.

               (b)    Where a candidate submits a thesis but does not complete the form specified in Rule 17.2.(a), he or she shall be deemed to have placed no restriction on access to the thesis and shall be deemed to have granted to the University the right specified in Rule 17.2.(c).

               (c)    As a condition of submitting a thesis for examination the candidate shall grant to the University a license to publish his or her thesis (in whole or in part) should it not otherwise have been published after a period of 10 years from the award of the degree. If the thesis is so published, the candidate shall be cited as author.

               (d)    Where the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research), in consultation with the committee, is satisfied that it is in the best interests of the University to do so, he or she may give the Librarian a notice in writing directing that a thesis shall be withheld from inspection for a specified period by any person except with the permission of the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research). The period so specified shall not be less than the period that may have been specified by the candidate in terms of Rule 14.2.(a).

               In cases where a restriction is placed on a thesis, all copies of the thesis held by the University shall be held in the Dixson Library and the Librarian of the Dixson Library and his or her staff shall be responsible for ensuring that the conditions of the restriction are complied with.