We were instructed by a client who had failed his second PhD attempt and thus had been awarded an MPhil rather than the PhD he had hoped to achieve.
Upon discussing the case with our client it became apparent that the person listed as his second supervisor was also one of his examiners. We advised our client that in our experience this was procedurally irregular.
We used our experience of other University procedures as well as that of the QAA Code of Practice to argue the point to the University. The University Appeal Panel decided that our interpretation was correct and there was a procedural irregularity due to the second supervisor acting as an examiner and voided both of our client’s PhD attempts and allowed him a further 12 months supervision in order to resubmit for PhD.
Again this was a decision that exceeded our client’s expectations and he was extremely happy to have the chance to gain his PhD as well as have further supervision.
