1/7

GORDON 6. tN1UM

I.. kCIIN LIDDLC

SPIOLTO P$CBCPITON

N. PAUL OECRP4ANN

R.DCROY

.W INTON

:5

V4

-7 / f

h.

SIIRUM, LIDDLE & IIEBENTON

BARRISTERS AND

SOLICITORS,

1614 8URRARD BUILDING.

lOO

WEST

GEORGIA

ST..VANCOUVCR 5, B.C.

July 25, 1967

Simon Fraser University

Burnaby2, B. C.

Attention: D.P. Robertson, Esq. , Registrar

Dear Sirs:

You have inquired whether the Faculty Council

has the right to keep its agendas, minutes and resolu-

tions confidential in matters relating to student

.

discipline without revealing them to the Senate for

review by the Senate. Seen from the other direction,

the question is whether the Senate has the power to

require the Faculty Council to submit its agendas,

minutesand resolutions to the Senate. Our opinion is

that the Faculty Council does have the right to keep

such information confidential and that the Senate has

no power to require such material to be submitted to it

by the Faculty Council.

There are no decided cases on this issue so

we are left with interpreting the bare language of the

Universities Act.. Sections 5 (2) and 25 of the Act

provide that the Faculty Council is one oE the six com-

ponent

parts of the University. The Faculty Council is

an independent component, standing on its own. This

point is of some significance because the same is not

true of other components of the University. Thus,

Convocation is. one of the components but by section 9

of the Act it is placed in a position subordinate to

the Senate. The Senate-controlsConVocation's procedure

and quorum and the time and place of its meetings. In

the (admittedly unlikely) event that there should be

S

an equal

.

ityof votes of the members of Convocation in

the election of theEã

o

ti

nctea-tsthe........

!

deciding vote. The Senate is not given powers over the

Faculty Council which are in any way comparable.

1

A

TCI.CPHON: 662-3100

Paper S-iS

. . .

2

---

I

,II67

-2--

Another indication of the independence of the

Faculty Council is the absence of provisions governing

its relationships with other components of the University.

In contrast we note that relations between the Board and

Senate are set out with some care in section 46

(f) , sub-

sections

(f),

(k)

and

(0)

of section 54 and section 55.

/The

1

sections of the Universities Act providing

•

the, Senate with various powers do not infringe the inde-

.penence of the Faculty Council.

Though section 27 of

the Act gives the Senate broad general cowers to make and

publish necessary rules in respect of nominations, elec-

tions and voting within the University, the conduct of

elections for members to the Faculty Council

is

reserved

to the Faculty Council itself by section 25.

Section 54

(m) which provides the Senate with the power to exercise

disciplinary jurisdiction over students by way of appeal

•

from the decisions of the Faculty Council is a limited

authority which does not give the Senate any power to in-

vestigate on its own initiative matters being considered

in the Faculty Council.

We interpret this section as

•

requiring a person to appeal from a decision of the Faculty

Council before the Senate acquires any interest in the

matter.

The sections setting out the powers of the

Faculty Council must also be examined.

Several sub-

sections of section 61 state that the Faculty Council

is

to exercise its powers subject to the approval of the

Senate.

However, the approval is restricted to certain

defined areas.

For example, the sub-section dealing

generally with student discipline provides the Faculty

Council with the power "subject to the approval of the

•

Senate, to make rules and regulations with respect to

student discipline, the establishment or discontinuance

of fraternities or sororities among the students, and

•

the general conduct of the members thereof."

This sub-

section gives the Faculty Council power to make regula-

tions

with respect to three separate matters: student

discipline, the existence of fraternities and sororities,

•

•

and the general conduct of members of fraternities and

sororities.

The Act gives the Senate the power to approve

or disapprove the regulations prepared.by

the Faculty

Council; it does not give the Senate a continuing super-

visory power over the way in which the Faculty Council

administers those regulations once they are approved.

The Senate

is

brought into the administration of the

regulations only when some person appeals a decision of

. .

0

3

---

çg(A.

1

1)

-3-

Sthe Faculty Council to the Senate. Another section of

the Act, section 62, goes on to grant a general right

of appeal to the Senate from decisions of the Faculty

Council but this general right is only granted to persons

"aggrieved by a decision" of the Faculty Council. In

short the Senate can not look into the affairs of the

Faculty Council at its own initiative.

To summarize again, the sections setting out

the powers of the Senate and the Faculty Council do not

limit the independence of action which

is implicit in

the manner in which the Faculty Council is established

under the Act. We repeat our conclusion that the Senate

does not have the power on its own motion to inquire

into the proceedings of the Faculty Council and to

receive copies of agendas, minutes and resolutions.

Finally, we draw your attention to section 52

of the Universities Act which gives the Board of Gover-

nors the final decision over questions about_the

.. powers

and duties of the various components of the University.

Curiously, the Faculty Council is omitted from the list

of components whose powers may be settled and determined

by the Board. The omission would cause no.difficulty

in.

.

the present situation because the Board could make its

decision as an interpretation of the powers of the

Senate.

Yours truly,

SHRUM, LIDDLE & HEBENTON

Sholto Hebenton

SH/ib

C.

a'