Moot Preparation Through Research and Learning

Reflection upon research and learning in preparation for Moot

We realized early on that in order to prepare a strong case for the moot court, we would have to ensure that our legal arguments are strong. For this, we also wanted to ensure that we found relevant precedents that would strengthen our arguments.

The precedents were chosen on the basis of the facts of the cases and the principle of law involved in the same. During the course of our research, we found that there were a number of cases, which appeared to have some similarity to our case. However, on closer scrutiny many of these cases were not directly related or provided a strong precedent for our arguments. Therefore, we had to be careful in assessing the cases for their relation to our own case and arguments.

At the time when we were researching for precedents, our focus was on the ratio decidendi of the cases and how this would also support the arguments being made by us. The case was related to frustration of contract and therefore, we first researched for similar cases that could be precedent for our case. Also important for our purpose was the court that had decided the case. Therefore, cases decided by the House of Lords or the Court of Appeal (for the period preceding Supreme Court’s establishment) were preferred for the purpose of citing as precedents.

For the purpose of effectively presenting the precedent, we related it to the argument, as it was being made. Thus, when we were presenting our argument for frustration of contract, the case Tsakiroglu v Noblee Thorl G.m.b.H respondents (1961) chapter 2 Weekly Law Reports page 633 was considered to be the appropriate precedent for the case.

During Moot 1, we were a team of three people, which were, Toshana, Manjot and I. I was a leader appellant. One more individual, Vanessa was to be a part of the team but that did not work out. The principal difficulty we encountered in the initial stage of the preparation was creating team cohesiveness. However, over the period of moot preparation, cohesiveness also was achieved. Another challenge was distributing work amongst ourselves, as we had decided that we will handle different aspects of the research in order to be more efficient. However, we were not always in agreement as to who will cover which area of research. Over the course of preparation, we devised systems by which we were able to distribute work without too much conflict or friction. In that sense, the moot preparation was a learning experience for all of us.

I have learnt that mooting is an intellectual as well as an organisational exercise. Intellectually, we are focussed on research and formulating the most cogent arguments to present the case. However, organisation of the material is also important. During the moot, one needs to go back and forth through the brief, books and notes of information. Unless this material is properly organised, one gets flustered. During the moot, it is important to present a collected and confident demeanour. Therefore, sound preparation of arguments and well organised material is essential to make a good impression on the court.

With regard to my performance during the moot court, I believe my performance was good. I base this assessment on two grounds. First, my preparation for the moot showed on the day of the moot. I was confident and I was able to express my arguments and reasoning effectively. Second, I was able to respond correctly to the questions asked during the moot court by the judges. I think one of the indicators of my performance was that I was able to explain the co-relation between the cases chosen as precedent for my arguments. I did notice that many students were not able to answer some of the questions put to them. I also noted that some students were not able to explain the co-relation between the precedents they put forth and their arguments. Based on this, I can say with some confidence that I performed well during the moot court.