The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Dishonesty and young people's liability: the case of academic misconduct

Dishonesty and young people's liability: the case of academic misconduct
Dishonesty and young people's liability: the case of academic misconduct

In 2017, in Ivey v. Genting Casinos, the Supreme Court judged that the dishonesty test is objective and should be the single one in use for any area of law. The judgment sparked some criticism regarding the inflexibility of an objective test. The subsequent 2020 Court of Appeal judgment in R. v. Barton confirmed the objective test in Ivey. However, little dedicated discussion and analysis of the dishonesty test has subsequently taken place, leaving a growing concern that the one currently in use may not be suitable for determining dishonesty in all contexts. This interdisciplinary collection challenges the idea of the single objective test by considering the issue of context in defining dishonesty. The volume is divided into three parts. The first focuses on the analysis of the concept of dishonesty and the dishonesty test, both in relation to context and its impact in determining whether or not liability arises. In the second part, the focus is on contexts of public and private dealings where dishonesty can be the reason to place liability or where its implications should be modified in order to limit liability. Finally, in the third part, the focus is on the context of healthcare practice and its interface with the conceptual dichotomy of honesty/dishonesty. The conclusion draws together shared themes, notably the issues of fairness and justice that arise from the work to demonstrate the definitional vacuum in the law on dishonesty. The book will be of interest to academics, researchers, policy-makers, and regulators working in law, ethics, or areas of professional regulation and misconduct, especially medicine, nursing, student academic misconduct, and politics. Similarly, there will be appeal to those working in relevant professional regulatory areas, such as law, healthcare, and sports governance.

127-143
Routledge
Tempowski, Rose
daf8e3a3-da04-4ee1-addc-751c3a0e5e1d
Telford, Mark
6827a668-f52c-4b04-ba4b-1ee794d66441
Santatzoglou, Sotirios
Wasik, Martin
Wrigley, Anthony
Tempowski, Rose
daf8e3a3-da04-4ee1-addc-751c3a0e5e1d
Telford, Mark
6827a668-f52c-4b04-ba4b-1ee794d66441
Santatzoglou, Sotirios
Wasik, Martin
Wrigley, Anthony

Tempowski, Rose and Telford, Mark (2025) Dishonesty and young people's liability: the case of academic misconduct. In, Santatzoglou, Sotirios, Wasik, Martin and Wrigley, Anthony (eds.) Dishonesty, Liability and the Law: Exploring the Moral Importance of Context. 1 ed. London. Routledge, pp. 127-143. (doi:10.4324/9781003470588).

Record type: Book Section

Abstract

In 2017, in Ivey v. Genting Casinos, the Supreme Court judged that the dishonesty test is objective and should be the single one in use for any area of law. The judgment sparked some criticism regarding the inflexibility of an objective test. The subsequent 2020 Court of Appeal judgment in R. v. Barton confirmed the objective test in Ivey. However, little dedicated discussion and analysis of the dishonesty test has subsequently taken place, leaving a growing concern that the one currently in use may not be suitable for determining dishonesty in all contexts. This interdisciplinary collection challenges the idea of the single objective test by considering the issue of context in defining dishonesty. The volume is divided into three parts. The first focuses on the analysis of the concept of dishonesty and the dishonesty test, both in relation to context and its impact in determining whether or not liability arises. In the second part, the focus is on contexts of public and private dealings where dishonesty can be the reason to place liability or where its implications should be modified in order to limit liability. Finally, in the third part, the focus is on the context of healthcare practice and its interface with the conceptual dichotomy of honesty/dishonesty. The conclusion draws together shared themes, notably the issues of fairness and justice that arise from the work to demonstrate the definitional vacuum in the law on dishonesty. The book will be of interest to academics, researchers, policy-makers, and regulators working in law, ethics, or areas of professional regulation and misconduct, especially medicine, nursing, student academic misconduct, and politics. Similarly, there will be appeal to those working in relevant professional regulatory areas, such as law, healthcare, and sports governance.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 31 July 2025

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 503195
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/503195
PURE UUID: 8d3c0381-4486-4151-aabb-4e8f1c829953
ORCID for Rose Tempowski: ORCID iD orcid.org/0009-0006-9015-6923
ORCID for Mark Telford: ORCID iD orcid.org/0009-0005-7912-5782

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 23 Jul 2025 16:44
Last modified: 01 Oct 2025 02:08

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Rose Tempowski ORCID iD
Author: Mark Telford ORCID iD
Editor: Sotirios Santatzoglou
Editor: Martin Wasik
Editor: Anthony Wrigley

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×