Competitions Guide 2023

COMPETITIONS GUIDE

Championship Moot

Moot Submission

Paper Presentation

What is it?

56

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Witness Examination

Preparation for Witness Examination

Intervarsity Competitions

What is it? MULS Environmental Law Moot

Michael Kirby Moot

Sir John Pedan Contract Law Moot

Philip C. Jessup

International Law Competition

Professional Skills

Client Interview

Structure of the Interview

Do’s and Don’t’s

Negotiations

Principles of Interest-Based Negotiations

Sample Agenda for Negotiations

Margaret Cunneen SC Witness Examination

From the Bench

What MULS Comps are you?

COMPETITIONS DIRECTOR

It’s time to dust off those suits, get comfortable with legal jargon, and prepare for an adrenaline filled year of competition. My name is Simone Alexander, the Director of Competitions, and I am very proud to present the Competition Guide for 2023.

Throughout my time in Macquarie, I have been an avid competitor, competing in a variety of competitions for each year of my law degree, even representing Macquarie in intervarsity level for ADR competitions. Participating in these experiences has been pivotal in building my public speaking and oral advocacy skills. It also has enabled me to hone my critical thinking, problem solving which are highly transferable into any professional sphere and even my academic studies. Furthermore, these unique experiences have offered me opportunities to meet with professional mentors and create incredible bonds with my fellow competitors.

This guide is the product of a collaboration between the Competition and Publication Portfolios, endeavouring to assist individuals eager to compete or those with competition experience looking for a new challenge. This guide in partnership with the Publication team offers a unique insight into MULS’ Competition Portfolio with useful tips and tricks and spotlights from past competitions. With the addition of brand new features such as sample submissions, suggested competition outlines, phrase banks, and quick references for prerequisites and competition

PUBLICATIONS DIRECTOR

Welcome to the MULS Competition Guide! My name is Mikaela and I am the Publications Director for 2023.

Welcome to the MULS Competition Guide! This Guide will be an invaluable source for understanding how you can participate in competitions and the insights critical to your preparation. Regardless of how you decide to participate, competitions provide an avenue in shaping your skills in both a professional and personal manner. Speaking from personal experience, competitions provide a unique opportunity to get to know your peers, learn from them (whether this be from students who regularly compete, academics, alumni who were successful competitors) and apply the knowledge you have acquired in your studies (i.e. teamwork, research, working efficiently).

This Guide highlights the different competitions which you can get involved in this year — that can be undertaken by all students (LLB and JD). Throughout this Guide, you will find how each competition is structured, the tips and tricks on preparation, sample agendas, experiences of successful competitors and other information that revolves around it. It is the aim of this guide that we showcase how rewarding participating in a competition is, whether you are first getting started or you are an avid competitor internally and/or externally. Further, the workshops and initiatives run by the Competitions Portfolio are of great assistance if you plan to compete this year and apply the skills they are learning in the classroom in a fun, practical setting.

commitment, this guide gives a fresh take on competitions. This guide will prove to be an invaluable reference for all your competition needs.

The biggest hurdle for any competitor is getting over that initial hesitancy to compete. Whether you are in your first year or your fifth, there is something for everyone. You never know the opportunities that you can create from competing, so have a go, take a chance, and see where this new endeavour takes you.

Good luck and Happy Competing!

Keep an eye on the MULS Competitions via Facebook and the MULS Website for opportunities to apply! Applications are open at the start of semester. I would like to extend my thanks to the Editor of this guide, Josh and the Competitions Director Simone Alexander, the entire competitions team, contributions from past competitors and judges and volunteers. Finally, I thank the designer, Julien Ortiz, who has done such a phenomenal job with designing the aesthetic and style of this Guide. This guide would have not been possible without any of your insights, contributions and ongoing support!

Mikaela Mariano

Simone Alexander

Welcome to Macquarie University! Congratulations on your successful admission to Macquarie Law School! Not only will you have a plethora of opportunities to immerse yourself in engaging law units, but can also become actively involved in our challenging yet highly rewarding law competitions and moots!

Speaking from experience, skills competitions and moots are extremely valuable. While preparation is time consuming on top of your study commitments, they put you in a prime position to enhance your professional skills, improve your ability to “think on your feet” in responding to unanticipated questions of law from judges, to collaborate with your peers, increase your proficiency in public speaking and learn about both the procedural and substantive elements of law.

We will be coordinating a diverse suite of competitions in both Semester 1 and 2 of 2023. Perhaps you may choose a particular moot because of interesting areas of law such as Criminal or Contract law, or because a particular moot would truly challenge your intellect or confidence and put you outside of your comfort zone to maximise your growth. You may choose a certain skills competition such as Negotiations or Client Interviews to improve your practical skills which can prove to be invaluable in the context of future professional practice where your ability to

MULS PRESIDENT

Picture this scenario. You have spent 23 hours on a flight from Sydney to Switzerland, and the last several months being occupied with preparing for the trip. You feel confident and ready for the numerous security screenings to which you will be subject before they let you pass through the doors of the United Nations Office in Geneva. You are with several friends from Macquarie Law School, accompanied by the ten best teams from each UN region, ready to argue a hypothetical human rights case before a bench of human rights experts. Welcome to the Nelson Mandela World Moot Court Competition.

The vastness of doors to which involvement in Macquarie University Law Society (MULS) competitions could open was borne on me once I had become thoroughly involved myself. Whilst I have yet to compete in an international competition, I can attest from my MULS competition involvement to the value one can derive by applying themself in MULS competitions whilst undertaking their studies at Macquarie University.

My name is Brendan Piech, fifth year LLB and 2023 MULS President. My involvement in MULS began with the 2020 MULS Junior Client Interview and Novice Moot Competition. It was an avenue to apply the concepts learnt within the classroom: legal research, written submissions, meeting prospective clients, and examination of witnesses and evidentiary rules of law.

Having competed in double digits worth of MULS, intervarsity and Australasian competitions, I often find myself weaving into everyday conversations on campus a word of encouragement

negotiate with an opposing side or advise a client may be the decisive factor as to whether you produce good outcomes for a client.

On behalf of the MULS Portfolio, we trust that you will enjoy and find value in competing in our various skills competitions and moot initiatives through the development of practical skills and engagement in extracurricular activity, opening up sources of career inspiration and opportunity. We look forward to seeing you compete!

to others to sign up for the competitions on offer by MULS and become involved in this aspect of the Macquarie Law School experience. I wish for as many Macquarie Law School students to experience the professional development and networking opportunities that competition involvement can offer you during your time at university.

Welcome to the 2023 MULS Competitions Guide. You will find information on various MULS advocacy and professional skills competitions and read testimonials and advice from previous student competitors. We hope you enjoy reading this MULS publication and find inspiration to either sign up for a MULS competition for the first time, continue your competing into another year, or, in the capacity of a judge, provide insights to students at the early stages of competing.

Brendan Piech

Joshua Brereton

MEET

COMPETITIONS

Simone Alexander Competitions Director

As Director of Competitions, my role is to oversee and assist in the organisational process of all the competitions both internally and externally. I am a point of contact for any queries and concerns you may have regarding competitions or if you simply want to have a chat.

A memorable competitions experience you have had in comps Despite participating in numerous competitions, one of the most memorable would have to be my very first competition–the Junior Client Interview. Fresh into law school with very limited legal knowledge and even less know-how of what a client interview was, it’s safe to say that I was petrified. However, I pushed myself to step outside of my comfort zone and thanks to that leap of faith, I was able to develop my critical thinking, time management, research,

COMPETITIONS TEAM

and problem-solving skills. Most importantly it has helped me establish friendships and professional networks which continue to flourish throughout my degree. I distinctly remember some judges spending over an hour of their time providing feedback and academic advice.

If you could only choose one comp to take part in, what would it be and why?

With some many wonderful competitions that MULS offer, you’re spoilt for choice. However, if it just had to pick one, I would say Negotiations. Negotiation is all about breaking down problems and finding the best outcome for your client. Therefore, unlike other competitions, you can often take a creative approach when

assessing issues and legal problems. It also is heavily reliant on teamwork which brings its own unique element to the table. It’s a must for any student at any stage in their degree.

A quick tip how you would balance participating in Comps and other commitments such as studying/uni

My recommendation is writing a list of all your university assignments, assessments and important dates on a calendar and ensuring you have an understanding of what sort of time commitments you will require. Blocking out time for competitions just like you would any other assignment helps you stay ahead and prevent unnecessary stress later on. Don’t forget to share the workload!

Emma Horgan Executive Officer — Foundations Competitions

Hi guys! My name is Emma and this year I am very glad to be running the Foundations of Law Moot and International Humanitarian Law Moot (IHL).

This Moot is specifically designed for first year law students who have already completed the first unit of their degree, LAWS1000 (Foundations of Law) and have no experience with mooting, however, want to get involved. Although mooting may seem unknown and scary, by competing in the Moot students are exposed to mooting in a supportive — but competitive — environment, which encourages learning and skill development.

Patricia Motahari Executive Officer — Foundations Competitions

Hi everyone! My name is Patricia and I am the 2023 Executive Officer for Foundations Competitions. I will be running the Novice Moot and International Humanitarian Law Moot (IHL). The Novice Moot will be running in Semester 2 and is designed for second-year students and up who have not mooted before but would like to gain experience with others who are interested in mooting. This year’s Novice Moot Question will focus on contract law and criminal law.

IHL will be running in Semester 1 and this moot builds from the knowledge gained in LAWS2000 (International Law), focusing on researching fundamental treaties, customs and general principles of international law. This year’s IHL Question will be discussing international rights.

Samuel Surhardi Executive Officer — Advocacy

Hi! My name is Sam and I am one of the Executive Officers for Competitions (Advocacy). This year we are running a number of competitions with the two most notable being mooting and witness examination.

Hi! My name is Sam and I am one of the Executive Officers for Competitions (Advocacy). This year we are running a number of competitions with the most notable being the Criminal Law Moot, Contract Law Moot and the Private Law moot. Mooting is a simulated court proceeding where students are faced with a legal issue they must resolve. Teams work together to present arguments before the judges just like the real world. Witness examination is where students act as a barrister in a trial and must cross-examine a witness in order to help establish their case. Competitors are faced with the challenge of thinking on their feet and asking critical questions to establish their position.

A memorable competitions experience you have had in comps I have only been able to experience one mooting competition, which was Foundations of Law. I remember being terrified but also excited to learn new skills and see what mooting was like. Now I am in the role of running the moot, so I think you can see the impact it had on me. I am officially addicted to mooting.

If you could only choose one comp to take part in, what would it be and why?

It’s so difficult to choose only one with so many options! I would love to compete in the Criminal Moot competition (which I will be definitely doing this year). I love Criminal Law and I know it will allow me to progress the skills I learned in the Foundations of Law Moot and challenge myself.

A quick tip how you would balance participating in Comps and other commitments such as studying/uni

Of course, like any new opportunity, it takes time to understand the amount of time you may have to dedicate. I recommend making sure that your University units are completely organised. This can be through knowing all your assignments, when your most overwhelming week would be and making sure you have prepared sufficiently. Additionally, for Moots, you can put your preference to the nights that work best for you and your team!

A memorable competitions experience you have had in comps

In 2022, I competed in the Junior Client Interview and made it to the Grand Finals with my partner. It was an intense and memorable question that challenged me but was extremely beneficial to my knowledge of the law and how to respond to tricky scenarios. This competition tested the skill of effectively communicating with a client by setting boundaries when necessary.

If you could only choose one comp to take part in, what would it be and why?

If I had to choose one competition to take part in, it would be the Novice Moot. I competed in the 2022 Gilbert + Tobin Novice Moot and found it to be an extremely challenging but worthwhile

competition to take part in. The competition taught me how to conduct legal research effectively under limited time constraints and how to efficiently formulate an argument that would be presented to judges.

A quick tip on how you would balance participating in Comps and other commitments such as studying/uni

My biggest tip for balancing competitions and uni work is to make sure you have hardworking and diligent teammates. Competitions are all about teamwork and equally valuable contributions, so make sure that all your teammates are up to speed with everything and communicate any issues that may intervene with preparation.

A memorable competitions experience you have had in comps

One of the most memorable competitions experiences I’ve had is being able to make new friends and learning how to draft legal submissions for moots. Mooting is definitely a worthwhile opportunity in developing professionally and socially. It also gives you an insight into the legal field.

If you could only choose one comp to take part in, what would it be and why?

Mooting is my favourite competition as the problem solving aspect and presenting arguments is really rewarding and engaging. It

also feels like a very practical skill to learn for any aspiring future barristers as the skills are directly transferable.

A quick tip how you would balance participating in Comps and other commitments such as studying/uni

Make sure you keep a timetable or calendar. I personally like Google Calendar as it helps you to manage deadlines and tasks for uni and competitions.

Caitlin Greaves Executive Officer — Advocacy

Hi everyone! My name is Caitlin and I am one of the Executive Officers for Competitions (Advocacy) 2023.

This year I am responsible for running the advocacy competitions, which includes the Diversity and Pride Moot, the Championship Moot and Witness Examination. These competitions assist students to develop important professional skills, such as critical thinking, time management, problem solving and legal research.

Zachary Haynes Executive Officer — Professional Skills

Hello everyone! My name is Zachary Haynes and I am the Executive Officer for Professional Skills. This year I will be running the Negotiations Competition in Semester 1 and the ADR Championships in Semester 2.

The Negotiations competition that will be running in Semester 1 is designed for any law student of any experience level. It is a great competition to start out with and develop your interpersonal skills. You will also need a teammate for this competition, however you can still sign up as an individual, but MULS cannot guarantee who you will be partnered with.

The Alternate Dispute Resolutions (ADR) Championships in Semester 2 is a competition that whilst experience is not required to enter, it is greatly beneficial to have experience in both negotiations and client interview competitions. You will also need a teammate for this competition.

Chadha

Executive Officer

— Professional Skills

Hello all! My name is Sujal Chadha, your Executive Officer for Professional Skills for 2023. I am in charge of running three competitions this year, Junior Client Interview and Paper Presentation in Semester 1 and Senior Client Interview in Semester 2.

The Client Interview competitions are separated into Senior and Junior by your year of University. These competitions allow individuals to experience a fun way to experience navigating potential client relationships and handle different situations and practice and improve their interpersonal skills. The Paper Presentation competition in Semester 1 allows students to write an academic paper about a legal topic they are passionate about. Through this competition, participants can improve their research, problem-solving and critical-thinking skills through the written component and their speaking and presentation skills through the oral component.

Sujal

A memorable competitions experience you have had in comps

This would have to be my first ever moot, which was held via zoom in lockdown. I remember how accomplished our team felt after we had finished our first round of the competition. We had developed confidence in researching through legal databases, formulating legal arguments and public speaking. The best part of the experience was the constructive feedback we received from the judges about our performance.

If you could only choose one comp to take part in, what would it be and why?

If I could only choose one competition, it would have to be the Criminal Law Moot! This moot allows you to put the skills and

knowledge you have learnt in LAWS1300 (aka the best law unit) to the test!

A quick tip how you would balance participating in Comps and other commitments such as studying/uni

Competitions, particularly mooting, require a substantial time commitment. I recommend students utilise good time management and keep on top of both university and competition deadlines. The best advice I received was to treat competitions like another university subject!

A memorable competitions experience you have had in comps

A broad, memorable experience for me is reflecting on the amount of times you are put on the spot in whichever competition you do, you simply cannot prepare for everything so those moments where you have to make a big decision you weren’t expecting and moving with it.

If you could only choose one comp to take part in, what would it be and why?

If I could choose only one comp, I would choose Negotiations. The preparation required for negotiations is far less demanding

compared to mooting and other competitions. The way that you are judged and awarded marks is not by ‘winning’ the negotiation, but rather how you do it, so it encourages the development of your soft skills.

A quick tip how you would balance participating in Comps and other commitments such as studying/uni

Make sure you begin preparation as early as possible. You won’t get the most out of the competition if you don’t prepare properly.

A memorable competitions experience you have had in comps

My first competition at MULS was negotiation which allowed me to step into the world of skill application and forced me to understand where I was lacking and how to improve that. It also allowed me to develop a patient mindset and taught me how to handle stressful situations and how to turn situations to my advantage.

If you could only choose one comp to take part in, what would it be and why?

The Novice Moot would be my choice as it was a true test of my problem-solving and critical-thinking skills. Further adding to the experience of the competition were the Criminal Law questions that were chosen for my rounds, as I always had an interest in Criminal Law. Through the competition, I showed my ability to be a team player and improved my research, speaking and presenting skills.

A quick tip how you would balance participating in Comps and other commitments such as studying/uni

Finding hobbies to enjoy would help with releasing stress from competitions and other commitments. Also, prioritise tasks and deadlines that you can do right now to make life easier later on and spend time with friends and family.

Executive Officer — External Advocacy Heidi Huggett

Hi! My name is Heidi and I am the Executive Officer for External Advocacy. I am overseeing all the External Advocacy Competitions, the most important of which is the MULS Environmental Law Moot running in Semester 2!

The MULS Environmental Law Moot is an intervarsity competition between universities all over New South Wales to moot over the problem surrounding Environmental Law, which is rapidly emerging and developing at the moment. Other competitions to look out for are the Sir John Pedan Contract Law Moot, Sir Harry Gibbs Constitutional Law Moot and the ESL Trilateral Moot between MULS, the Sydney University Law Society and the UNSW Law Society!

Reji Executive Officer — External Professional Skills

Hi everyone, my name is Caroline and I am the Executive Office for External Professional Skills. The competitions that I will be running this year will include the MULS x SULS ADR Competition, ADC-ICC Asia Pacific Commercial Mediation Competition and Margaret Cunneen Witness Examination Competition.

The MULS x SULS ADR features two rounds consisting of a client interview followed by a negotiation based on the same scenario. The scenario will present the team with several issues that need to be dealt with within a short time frame. MULS will be nominating teams of two students for this competition.

The Margaret Cunneen Witness Examination is run alongside the University of Technology Sydney and is gratefully adjudicated by Margaret Cunneen SC. The competition will take the form of a one-off grand final round in which teams will compete against each other once. Applications for this competition are open to both undergraduate and postgraduate students who possess strong witness examination experience as well as experience as a witness in previous competitions.

Caroline

A memorable competitions experience you have had in comps

My first in-person round of any competition — that being the semifinals of the Junior Client Interview. All the previous competitions I had competed in, that being the Foundations of Law Moot and Criminal Law Moot had been online. It was such an exhilarating experience going to campus in a suit and competing in front of actual judges!

If you could only choose one comp to take part in, what would it be and why?

The Client Interview Competition is a personal favourite of mine. It is practical, fun and sets you up really nicely for work in the legal field. Because it’s not focused on any one area of law, one week you

could be focusing on family law and the next on workplace health and safety. This allows for such a vast understanding of different topics and ensures the work is always interesting and fun!

A quick tip how you would balance participating in Comps and other commitments such as studying/uni

Make sure you know the level of work required for the competition you are entering. For example, mooting is much more time consuming than other professional skills competitions such as Negotiations and Client Interviews. It’s no use entering a large competition with a large amount of preparation if you simply cannot commit.

The ADC-ICC Asia Pacific Commercial Mediation Competition allows university students to practice their negotiating skills in a commercial mediation setting, which is an essential area of dispute resolution in international commercial law. Competing teams will represent two sides of an international commercial dispute and will be assessed on how well the teams have advanced their interests.

A memorable competitions experience you have had in comps

A memorable competition experience I had was when I took part in the Novice Moot Competition, which was my first ever law school competition. It was a really interesting experience working with my friends and tackling problem questions. The situation was completely new to us, and we were learning everything on the spot. In spite of that, it provided us with a glimpse into what reallife advocacy might be like and helped us practise skills we hadn’t encountered yet.

If you could only choose one comp to take part in, what would it be and why?

I would participate in the MULS x SULS ADR Competition. The competition involves a client interview, negotiation, letter of advice and presentations. It would be a great way to get exposure to a wide range of professional skills, meet with competitors from different universities and expand your network!

A quick tip on how you would balance participating in Comps and other commitments such as studying/uni

Organising your time at the beginning of the semester and continuously throughout your semester, noting assessment due dates, is probably the best way to balance competing in competitions with volunteering, law school, or paid work.

OVERVIEW OF COMPETITIONS

SEMESTER 1

• Junior Client Interview

• Negotiations

• International Humanitarian Law Moot

• Criminal Law Moot

• Diversity + Pride Moot

• Paper Presentation

SEMESTER 2

• Foundations of Law Moot

• Novice Moot

• Championship Moot

• Private Law Moot

• Senior Client Interview

• ADR Championship

• Contract Law Moot

• Witness Examination

• MULS x SULS ADR Intervarsity Competition

• MULS x SULS Sir John Peden Contract Law Moot

• MULS X SULS X LLS ELS Moot

• UTS LSS x MULS Bilateral Contract Law Moot

• UNSW Private Law Moot

• UTS Negotiations Competition

• MULS Environmental Law Moot

• Sir Harry Gibbs Constitutional Law Moot

• Michael Kirby Contract Law Moot

• ADC-ICC Asia-Pacific Commercial Mediation Competition 2023

• UNSW Skills IV

• SULS Client Interview

• Margaret Cunneen Witness Examination

HOW TO GET INVOLVED IN COMPETITIONS

PARTICIPATING AS A COMPETITOR

Advocacy

Advocacy competitions mimic appellate court proceedings and provide students with practical experience in developing legal arguments and oral presentation. Mooting is one type of advocacy competition in which a team of students are given a factual scenario based on a certain subject matter such as Contracts or Criminal Law and must prepare submissions based on the relevant legislation and case law. If going solo is more your style, Witness Examination replicates a civil or criminal trial from opening statements, examination of witnesses to closing addresses and students compete on their own.

Foundations

If you are in the early stages of your Law degree or are new to competitions, MULS offer introductory mooting competitions based on foundational legal knowledge. First year students who have completed LAWS1000* are eligible to compete in the Foundations Moot and second or third year students who haven’t competed before can try out the Novice Moot Competition.

Professional Skills

Professional Skills competitions replicate other key tasks undertaken by practicing lawyers including Client Interview and Negotiation. These competitions are invaluable for developing transferable skills such as client rapport, communication and strategy implementation.

For those more interested in the theoretical aspects of law, the Paper Presentation competition provides the opportunity for academic flare.

PARTICIPATING AS A JUDGE

Judging is open to students who have previously been successful in the respective competition. Judges benches are typically filled with solicitors, barristers and esteemed academics alongside student judges who provide the essential livelihood and personal experience essential to a well-rounded bench. Judging is incredibly beneficial as students have the opportunity to meet with preeminent lawyers and develop further skills in communication and critical thinking. To Participate as a Student Judge, you would need to have been a semi-finalist or a grand finalist in the competition you wish to judge for.

If you are interested in judging and would like further guidance, please see the relevant rules for professional skills, advocacy and foundations as to the student requirements for judging.

PARTICIPATING AS A VOLUNTEER

If you cannot meet the time commitment and are unable to compete, but still want to participate, acting as a volunteer in a competition is an excellent way to get involved! More applicable to the Witness Examination and Junior and Senior Client Interview, acting as a witness or client for a competition is a great way to get exposed to competing, and to understand the skills and benefits of competing.

MY EXPERIENCE AS A VOLUNTEER

by Bradley Cagauan

Why did you decide to volunteer?

I volunteered for both the client interview and witness examination because at the time, I was daunted by the competitions but I also wanted to see what it was all about. It was inspiring seeing students act like real lawyers. Furthermore, it also gave me a deeper appreciation of the challenges lawyers face whether it be in ascertaining the ‘right’ information from a witness or advising a client in plain english.

Benefits

The most obvious benefit is that you’ll get an up-close look at how students use the skills lawyers use everyday without the stress of competing. It is inspiring watching students use these skills and may even inspire you to compete in the next competition! If you’re interested in competitions but strapped for time or unsure, be sure to volunteer!

To find out more about specific dates, competition registration and ways to get involved follow this page:

COMPETITION WORKSHOPS

Advocacy Workshops

The Advocacy Workshops will provide a general introduction to both the written and oral components of Mooting competitions. One workshop will run in collaboration with the MULS Education portfolio to focus on legal writing skills, legal research and referencing to assist competitors with how to approach written submissions. The other will focus on oral advocacy such as the unique courtroom jargon and the structure of the competition. These workshops will also give attendees a chance to meet prior successful competitors and judges and ask any pressing questions. Keep an eye out on the MULS Facebook page for the dates of the workshops, and recordings will be available on the Macquarie Law Society website.

Professional Skills Workshops

The Professional Skills Workshop series is a two part breakdown of Client Interview and Negotiations style competitions. This year attendees will have the opportunity to hear from previous competitors and their experience. Videos breaking down negotiations and learning valuable skills to assist in preparing for competitions will be a focus of these workshops. These workshops are also valuable for those interested in the ADR Championship competition as they address essential elements to this competition such as client rapport. Keep an eye out on the MULS Facebook page for the dates of the workshops, and recordings will be available on the Macquarie Law Society website.

Judging Workshop

Judging workshops will be available to student judges to help foster consistency across all competitions. Constructive feedback is one of the best tools to ensure the ongoing success of Macquarie students in competitions.The purpose of these workshops are to encourage and guide new students in the judging pool with the hopes this will result in a diverse and fair bench.

MULS MEMBERSHIP

Being a member of MULS is mandatory for competitors!

Membership costs $5 annually, and MULS members have exclusive access to a number of perks beyond Competitions, including:

• Discounts on the majority of MULS ticketed events

• 10% off at Cult Eatery locations;

• Fortnightly newsletters packed with first hand insight into various initiatives on offer.

Sign up here: https://www.joinit.org/o/macquarieuniversity-law-society or scan the QR code below:

NEW COMPETITIONS AND INITIATIVES

International Women’s Day Initiative

After last year after great success, we are excited to continue in this tradition focusing on the 2023 theme of #EmbracingEquity. This initiative is centred on bringing together prominent female lawyers and leaders in their respective fields to share their journeys and challenges with MULS female and non-binary members. Unlike other events run by MULS, this initiative is a joint collaboration between a majority of the portfolios spanning Social Justice, Events, Marketing, Careers and Competitions. Throughout this event, we are focused on providing value to our female members by intertwining topical discussion on how to become the best advocate for yourself with practical workshops focus on personal brand-building and interview skills.

Competitions Expo

This new initiative targets students across varying stages of their degrees to engage with a variety of competitions offered by MULS. This event will allow students to interact with judges, past competitors, and competition executives to hear firsthand accounts of the benefits of competing. Throughout the evening there will also be live demonstrations of various types of competitions including Negotiations, Client Interview, mooting, Witness Examination and Paper Presentation to provide all attendees with an appreciation of oral advocacy and professional skills from competitor alumni.

Awards Recognition Night

This evening is intended to provide an opportunity to recognise the talent pool of Macquarie University. Students who have entered the grand final stages and above will be formally invited to attend the evening as well as judges, volunteers in recognition of their efforts over the past competion season. Furthermore, there will be an opportunity for students and judges to elect certain individuals to recognise their talents through different award categories.

GLOBAL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM (GLP)

The Global Leadership Program (GLP) is a co-curricular program offered at Macquarie with a focus on cross-cultural leadership, entrepreneurship and knowledge. Contributing to MULS competitions is recognised by the GLP and may satisfy the completion of experimental credit. Pre-approval of activities from a GLP Advisor is strongly recommended. For more information, click here: https://students.mq.edu.au/experience/global-leadership

• Participation in competition may fall under GLP code GLX14 or X31

•  Acting as a competitions representative may satisfy GLX25A, GLX09A or GLX04A.

JURIS-DOCTOR & POSTGRADUATE INVOLVEMENT

Whilst all comps are valuable to all students and add experience we understand that JD has challenges of time commitment and availability. Throughout this guide, we will be signposting specific competitions that is accommodating to a person who is doing a JD Degree. To accommodate to JD’s who wish to participate in competitions, whilst balancing other commitments, we suggest the following competitions:

CIient Interview

• Client interviews require less time to prepare and have a lower time commitment. You are not required to conduct heavy legal research or have an expected “legal knowledge” that is would be expected in competitions such as subject based mooting.

• Client interview is much more flexible in the way that you can participate as a competitor or as a volunteer! If you are unsure about competing in this type of competition, being a volunteer is another way to be exposed to the nature of this competition. This is particularly good for JD Students who have multiple commitments.

• The duration of the competition is shorter than other competitions with senior preliminary rounds going for 30 mins.

• Individual signs ups are welcome however you will be assigned on a first come first serve basis.

Novice Moot

• This is ideal for students who would like to compete in a moot but have not completed the Foundations of Law Moot.

• The question is designed to target second-years and above and therefore touches substantive areas of law. However, some initial structure is provided to assist teams when initially approaching the question.

• Can be teams to up to 4 — Ability to share the workload or be suited to a role which you enjoy eg. research or speaker.

• This is also a great competitions for JD Students who want to practice and improve their legal and advocacy skills.

International Humanitarian Law Moot

•  For those who have competed in the Novice Moot and want to engage in future competitions.

• One question is used throughout the competition, therefore a large portion of the preparation can be done early on in the competition.

• Designed intentionally for mooters to get a taste of international advocacy at a smaller scale.

Kelly Neighbour - Competitor & Psychology/Law Undergraduate

I cannot recommend getting involved in the competitions run by MULS highly enough! Best experience I had at university!

I was a little nervous about the competitions and not entirely sure I was good enough to compete. I strongly recommend doing what I did, which was to volunteer with MULS first to act as a client in the Client Interview and mooting competitions. This gave me the opportunity to see what the competitions looked and felt like before I committed to competing myself. Trust me, these competitions are not as scary and daunting as they may seem. Try it, you have nothing to lose! I entered the Client Interview competitions and the Negotiation competitions, and finally the Criminal Law Moot which our team won that year!

Aside from the thrill of winning a mooting competition, I learned so much in the process! I also made some really good friends. The judges in these competitions don’t tear you to pieces or turn into

Negotiations

• This competition is good for those who would like a challenge but do not have the time to commit to a moot.

• In general, there is more research conducted compared to client interviews (this research can relate to understanding Best/ Worst Alternatives to Negotiated Agreement (BATNAs & WATNAs), Concessions, Trade offs etc). Typically research does not extend deeply into a specific area of law like a moot.

• There is a unique aspect of a partnership and teamwork required — there is a shared workload where you and your partner will need to break down the facts, understand what’s in the client’s best interest and how to get the best outcome for them, trying to come up with the a creative solution that will mutually benefit the parties involved etc.

• Preliminary rounds contained for 50 mins.

Witness Examination

• The preparation required is not as demanding as moots. However competitors are expected to have an rudimentary understanding of the Evidence Act and it is highly recommended to have completed the unit LAWS3400 (Evidence) before registering in the competition.

• Witness Examination is flexible in the sense that you can be a volunteer or a competitor. If you find yourself not having the time to adequately prepare, you can volunteer to be the client and work with the participant about potential questions that may be raised by opposing counsel. This is still a great way to be exposed to trial advocacy!

• Good for JD students who are good at ‘thinking on their feet’ and critical thinking skills.

two-headed monsters when you get something wrong. They give really good feedback and advice allowing you to improve with each round. It also gives you a really good idea of how things run in a courtroom situation.

As for juggling your priorities and your time, you will need to determine if you have the time to commit to a competition. Personally, I enjoyed the competitions and saw it as down time from my study and work commitments. The Client Interview and Negotiation competitions don’t really take up a lot of your time. Mooting takes up a little more time, but you are in a team of 3 or 4 and personally, I found that my team was very supportive, and we helped each other out when necessary. Keep in mind that it is an amazing opportunity and an experience that will be hugely beneficial to you as you move into the legal profession. It will build your confidence and improve your legal skills immeasurably. Good luck!

ADVOCACY

PLEASE NOTE: The information provided is intended as a guide only and does not replace the Competitions Rules and Manuals.

WHAT IS MOOTING?

A moot is a simulated court proceeding in which students are faced with a legal issue they must resolve. The issue will be based on an appeal from a previous court decision on the scenario, and will require the appellant team to argue as to why the previous decision should be overturned, with the respondent team attempting to uphold it. Teams present both written and oral arguments before the judges, just as would occur in a real court case.

STRUCTURE

1. Prior to the competition, participants are provided with a hypothetical scenario which will require them to use their legal knowledge and skills to prepare written submissions in support of their argument. Each team will then share their submissions with the other side.

2. Each team will allocate two members, known as senior and junior counsel, to present their side’s oral submissions to the judges.

3. Throughout this speaking time, judges will periodically interrupt speakers to clarify aspects of their team’s argument. This is a great opportunity for competitors to demonstrate their knowledge of the law and their understanding of its relevance to the scenario at hand.

4. Once both the appellant and respondent teams have finished presenting their arguments, the judges will retire to consider the results of the competition. Then, once the results have been announced, feedback will be provided to competitors.

TIPS & TRICKS

Do your research.

JUDGING CRITERIA

ORGANISATION OF PRESENTATION

Competitors should be able to clearly present a clear and logical argument that touches the relevant laws, test and legal principles. Marks are awards for neat and orderly structure.

DEVELOPMENT OF ARGUMENT

Assess how competitors have engaged with the specific area of law by noting if relevant tests and principles have been applied to the relevant facts. Here competitors should seek arguments which are adaptable and anticipatory to opposing arguments.

QUESTIONS FROM THE BENCH

Judges seek competitors who engage with their comments, questions, and views. It is highly recommended that competitors use this as an opportunity to both clarify and integrate their arguments, but also take lead of the conversation where necessary to avoid potentially irrelevant or distracting questions.

Summarise your cases.

Preparation is imperative in mooting, and you should be doing a hefty amount of research when building up your argument. It is important to consider what the legal issues arising are and aim to find recent and influential decisions to support your case. It is also recommended that competitors think about the contentious issues within the question, and draft potential responses to questions asked by the bench.

Your submission must be founded in statute and common law. Making a case summary is a great way to make sure you understand its legal relevance and gives you an easy reference point for revision.

Read the question carefully!

Another important thing to consider is the factual scenario. While understanding the relevant law is important, being able to apply it to the factual scenario approp-riately is crucial. Being able to identify the minor details within the factual scenario is essential for persuading a judge and in turn, success in mooting. Read and understand the mooting handbook. This will help you to understand the process of the moot and the guidelines and etiquette you must abide by.

Signpost. Think about this in terms of making it easier for the judges to understand and follow your argument. Judges shouldn’t be looking at your written submissions in confusion, but rather concentrating on what you are presenting. Thus, it is recommended that you take the effort to outline and indicate your arguments at the beginning of your submissions.

Lastly, keep mooting!

While we’ve all heard it before, practice is the best way to learn. You may not have performed as well as you would’ve hoped in some competitions but use that as your drive to learn more and succeed in future moots!

MANNER AND EXPRESSION

The aim of mooting is not simply to force through your arguments as these are already presented in your written submission. Competitors who can engage with questions and concerns from the bench while respectfully explaining their submissions will receive higher marks. The focus is on how easily competitors can express themselves and others.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

Submissions which concentrate on covering the issues presented in a well-structured argument that demonstrate research skills show a higher degree of preparation and skill. Submission should be clear and succinct yet still be easy to follow.

For more information, please refer to https://www.muls. org/competitions-resources.

MOOTING TIPS & TRICKS

01. 02.

Know the General Rules of Mooting.

It is strongly recommended to go through the Mooting Handbook and the General Rules of the specific moot you are interested in. You should familiarise yourself with what to expect in the competitions, rules and regulations concerning written submissions, oral arguments, structure, teams and other important information.

Know the facts!

You can never read the facts ‘too many times’. Even if you have a good understanding of the facts, there might be ideas, arguments or small details that may work in your favour, that you do not notice the first time you read it.

When you first receive the facts, make sure that you get a good grasp of what the hypothetical is about. Do not be concerned with adding the relevant law or case law just yet. Who are the parties involved? What is the context of the hypothetical? What is the relationship between the two parties? What are the main issue/s? What are each parties’ arguments?. You may want to annotate it or highlight information that is important.

Once you have a good understanding, then go through the hypothetical with a fine-toothed comb. You can ask the following questions:

• Are there any holes / missing information that could work in my favour? Or even the opposing team’s favour?

• Which specific facts are relevant to what you want to argue?

• How could you use case law to distinguish or show that the facts are similar? If they end up working in the opposing team’s favour, how could you rebut that?

• When the facts aren’t given, what does this mean for your arguments?

• What implications may and may not be able to be drawn?

Know the law.

In applying the relevant bits of law to the facts provided, you must make sure that you are providing the correct, specific section of the legislation you are using. You may also want to consider, if the terms in the specific section of the legislation you are using have been defined in the statute or have particular sections been interpreted by cases. When using cases you may want to consider:

• What is the current point of law?

• The facts, ratio, orbiter and judgement of the case. Make sure you have a holistic understanding of the case.

• Was there a unanimous decision? If not, what was the minority, dissenting opinion?

• How was the law applied in the case?

• Did this case follow a precedence, or if this case served a precedence in another case.

• Did it confirm/overturn a precedent? Did this case challenge authority?

Consider the other team’s thinking.

When you are preparing for mooting, you might think about what the other side is likely to argue. Further, you may consider what case law works really well for the other team and how we can make that work in your favour.

03. 04. 05.

Time + Structure in an Oral Submission = Your Best Friend!

You need to make sure that you are aware of the time when you are practising your arguments. However, this does not mean that you should speak extremely fast when you are presenting your argument to fit everything in the time. If you do this, it is likely that you will lose a sense of structure and may end up confuse the judges as they attempt to understand your argument.

Provide a clear and logical structure to your argument. You need to make sure that the judges can follow your structure and you are confident in your arguments, should they decide to intervene and ask questions about your submissions. If your arguments are poor, it may invite questions, and you might be trapped into agreeing to a series of things that is contrary to your original argument, if you haven’t thought about your arguments.

One common mistake that is seen throughout moots is that when the judges ask a question, counsel tends to respond immediately, which may lead to not answering the judge’s question. Of course, there will be times where counsel may be able to answer the judge’s questions straight away (e.g. what were the facts of XYZ?).

However, for more difficult questions, take a few seconds to process what the judge is asking. Maybe take a sip of water, clear your throat etc to process the information. This will show the judges that you are taking the time to reflect the question that is being asked and attempting to answer the question correctly.

Remember, judges are willing to give feedback and use it to see what you did well to keep doing, and where you can improve. The Judge may comment that you spoke too fast/too slow, your understanding of the law, formal court language etc.

When you are expressing your arguments, explain your line of thinking to the bench in plain English. Try and simplify it for them to understand.

When you can, be responsive to the bench. Whilst it is okay to not respond straight away, and taking the time to think about how you would respond to the question, try not to say you would come back to their questions or you will be doing it later in the submissions. Remember, the judges want to know the answers now, and not later.

DO’S R

•  Do create a schedule. This schedule might include days to read the facts, days to do research, days to start draft, days to finalise, days to submit submissions, days to meet up etc.

• Do know your facts inside out.

• Do make sure to distribute work evenly — whether this be assigning people to research certain cases, practicing orals or drafting apart of their submission.

• Do take a break. Competitions are a marathon not a sprint. It is important to review work to prevent critical errors and avoidable mistakes.

Try not to use a written speech! I know it will be hard, especially when you’re competing for the first time, however, having dot points make it easy to have conversations with the bench. It also indicated to the bench that you are confident in the arguments you are making and if they throw a question to you, you can think well on your feet. Further, if you are speaking off from a prepared speech, you could break eye contact and not engage with the judge.

Keep a table on cases you research. You may want to highlight cases you are using, cases that confirm your argument and keep in a table so all your research is organised. Further, if you do this, when you receive the opposing counsel’s written, nothing will be of surprise to you. It is also recommended keeping a list of irrelevant cases so you don't have to check a case more than once.

• Don’t underestimate preparation and practice. In order to articulate your arguments well, you will need as much practice as you can get, this is the opportunity to reflect on what strengths and weaknesses you have in your argument and your execution of it.

• Don’t postpone answering questions from the Bench. Make sure to answer questions directly.

• Don’t feel like you have to answer questions from the Bench in a rushed manner. You can take your time to think through the question and your answer.

• Don’t do an information overload in your written submissions. Your written submissions should be concise, judges love to see white spaces!

Do not feel like you need to respond straight away when asked a question.

Remember, you are having a conversation with the bench!

Feedback is important!

Do not use a written speech, get into the habit of using dot points.

Keep a table of cases.

PHRASE BANK

“May it please the Court”

Use instead of:

“Um”; “Ladies and Gentlemen”; “Good Afternoon” etc.

A polite introductory phrase used at the beginning of submissions, in between submissions and at the conclusion of the oral submissions.

“Your Honour” To address a judge.

Use instead of:

“Sir”; “Madam”; “You”

“My learned friend”

Use instead of:

“My opponent”; “The opposition”; “him/her”; he/she”; “my colleague”; “John/Jenny”.

To refer to the opposing counsel, e.g. “My learned friend suggested that there was no duty of care. However, we submit . . .”

Use instead of: “My colleague”; “John/Jenny” etc.

To refer to your co-counsel.

Use instead of:

“I/We think”; “I/We feel”; “I/We believe”; “I/We would argue.”

To introduce any submission, point or argument.

e.g. “We submit that Mr. Smith breached his duty of care.”

N.B. Do not say “counsel submits.”

Where you do not know an answer to a question.

Use instead of:

“I don’t know”; “I’m not sure”; “um....”

To introduce a new submission.

Use instead of:

“My first point is...”; “the first/ next thing I wish to say is...”

N.B. Use sparingly if at all, it is your role to be prepared to answer the court’s questions!

“My learned senior/junior”

“We submit”

“I cannot assist the court on that matter”

“I will now turn to my first/next submission”

“My learned Co-Counsel”

/

This phrase bank is from the following document: General Mooting Manual

Use instead of:

“I disagree”; “You’re wrong.”

To correct the bench or disagree with them, e.g. “with respect your Honour, that is not correct/not our submission.”

Use instead of:

“I need to finish my point”; “I have not finished”

Where the judge is pressing you to move on but you are not ready to do so or you have not finished your submission, e.g. “your Honour, if I could be heard for a moment longer on the point of breach of duty, we submit...”

Where a judge agrees with the submission and does not need to hear more, e.g. “If your Honour is content to accept without further submission that there was a breach of duty, then I will now turn to my submission on causation.”

Use instead of:

“Okay, if your Honour is happy with that, then...”; “Um, ok then.”

Use instead of:

“Oops...”; “Sorry”; “Can I take that back”; any swear words etc.

To retract an incorrect statement. e.g. “your Honour, in that case the High Court held – I withdraw that –the Court of Appeal held...”

Use instead of:

“Oh well, when you put it that way . . .”; “Don’t worry about that point, your Honour.”

“I embrace/ adopt that”

Use instead of:

“I agree”; “That’s right, your Honour”.

A graceful way of making a concession, after the judge has revealed weaknesses in your argument, e.g. “your Honour, I don’t press that, but I would move to my alternative submission which is...”

Where you agree with a comment the judge has just made, e.g. Q. “It seems to me that she fails on a ‘but for’ analysis”; A. “I adopt what your Honour says and this is why we submit the ‘normative’ test should be rejected.”

N.B. If the point is essential to your case, you cannot concede this point!

Please note that the information provided here in this Guide is not a replacement of the MULS Manuals for Moots. For more information about the Rules and Regulations about Specific Moots and General Manuals, please refer to the link: Competitions (Resources) — Macquarie University Law Society

“With respect, your Honour”

“If I could be heard for a moment longer...”

“If your Honour is content to accept that without further submission”

“I withdraw that”

“I don’t press that point”

FOUNDATIONS OF LAW MOOT

OVERALL COMMITMENT: MODERATE COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Commitment must be highly consistent as there must be time allocated to extensive legal research (case law, legislation etc), practising and finalising oral and written submissions.

Prerequisites:

First year LLB or JD Student who has completed LAWS1000

• No prior university mooting experience

• Teams consistent of 2-4 students, with 2 students being counsel and the other instructing solicitors

If you are a first year law student you are eligible to compete in the Foundations of Law Moot! This moot is a fantastic opportunity for students who have no experience with mooting but want to get involved. It is specifically designed to expose students to mooting in a supportive, but competitive environment, which encourages learning and skill development.

Workshops are also run before the moot so you can feel comfortable in written submissions and how to orally present. Mooting in general, allows law students to react to hypothetical questions and use statutory interpretation, legal writing, and reasoning.

You can have teams of 2-4 with the competition structured with three preliminary rounds, followed by further final rounds and of course the grand final round, where friends and family can join and watch the end of the competition. Mooting is challenging but ultimately rewarding and develops skills that are essential throughout all areas of law and life.

GRAND FINAL WINNER 2022 Anastasia Musoclino

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

Before doing the Foundations of Law moot, I had no idea about what mooting was. In the preparation prior to the competition, I found it was useful to watch videos of moots on Youtube to visually see how it worked. In addition, reading the materials given by the Foundations of Law Moot Executive is also important as it includes examples of written submissions and details the rules and language use. I would do this preparation in small chunks either at the end of my day, or as breaks from study. My team and I would also then have a group call and present our findings to each other.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

As the competition rounds are fortnightly, it is best to plan ahead and know that the bulk of your research will have to be done in the first week, and then the oral will most likely be put together in the second week. My

If you are a first year law student you are eligible to compete in the Herbert Smith Freehills Foundations of Law Moot! This moot is designed for first-year law students to gain exposure to competitions in a supportive setting. It is a gentle introduction to mooting with the research materials provided to you and a number of preliminary rounds to focus on improving your skills. It also acts as a great way to develop your professional advocacy skills with your peers. The competition is structured with a set of three preliminary rounds, followed by two further final rounds and culminating in a grand final round accessible to friends and family!

team and I would try and get as much done in the first week as possible, so that in the second week we would just have to present and then could catch up on any Uni work that was needed. Mooting is a big time commitment, but it is definitely achievable if you split the work up evenly with your team, and write out a list of tasks to do every day so that you aren’t replacing Uni time with mooting, but rather creating breaks in your Uni work or between classes to work on the moot. It won’t be easy, and mooting may sometimes take more time than it should but you will fall into a routine as the competition goes along!

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition? And how did you overcome it?

The most difficult element of the competition for me was the questions that could come from the judge/s during the moot. Unlike public speaking or debating, judges will stop you mid speech and question the validity of your argument! Whilst this is clearly an intimidating spot to be in, I overcame it by remembering that the

“Mooting is challenging but ultimately rewarding and develops skills that are essential throughout all areas of law and life.“

judges know you are not fully experienced in the law yet, and are just trying to see how you bounce back from difficult questions rather than seeing if you can give the ‘right’ answer. A deep breath, asking them to word the question in another way, or the worst case — politely saying you are unable to answer the question, can go a long way!

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development, especially throughout your first year of studies?

Mooting is as close as you will get to court litigation during University, with the benefit of not having a real client counting on you! It is highly valuable as it enables you to perfect your research skills, confidence in explaining an argument, and also become familiar with writing good submissions which are always used by litigating lawyers. This was especially valuable throughout my first year of studies as it made me a more efficient researcher which was reflected in my class assignments, as well as force me to recall and apply the fundamental ideas taught in the Foundations of Law unit.

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate(s) were operating efficiently?

Working in a team can be a challenge at the best of times, but instilling a routine early on that makes the workload as even as possible is crucial to the longevity and success of the team. What worked well for us was to create a few case briefs each from the prescribed cases, and then share the findings with each other. This meant that each person

only needed to do half/a third/a quarter of the preliminary work (depending how many are on your team). everyone had a chance to write and present an oral. Finally, everyone helped write the written submission. Sometimes we would just do a few submissions each, or where we could, we would call and write it altogether.

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a firsttime competitor?

As a first-time competitor, I wish I knew what a moot actually looked and sounded like. While this sounds super basic, simple things like the order of speakers, introductions, formalities, and language use were completely foreign to me! It was really daunting and hard to visualise the competition I was walking into — where I was unsure of how to refer to the judges or my teammates, as well as how to translate our written submission points into a formal and fleshed out oral presentation. So, my tip is to just watch moots on YouTube, or come along to our moot demonstration during O-Week to see first-hand what it looks like! The more familiar you are with the layout of a moot, the easier it is to walk through it yourself when the rounds begin.

Anastacia Musoclino — 2022 Foundations Law Moot

“Judgesknowyouare notfullyexperienced inthelawyet,andare justtryingtoseehow youbouncebackfrom difficultquestions ratherthanseeingif youcangivethe‘right’ answer.”

“Instilling a routine early on that makes the workload as even as possible is crucial to the longevity and success of the team.”

familiarise yourself with the layout of a moot

GRAND FINALIST WINNER

Ella Bennett

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

In the first round, we assigned different cases for each group member to read and write case briefs so that we could easily refer to the cases in future rounds. Additionally, for each subsequent round, we would allocate who the two counsels were, something that cycled each round to allow everyone to speak. In terms of allocating my time, I set aside my evenings to work on the oral presentations.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

There were multiple times when the competition would be held at times that interfered with pre-existing commitments. Sometimes these clashes are unavoidable. To manage this, I would change my usual working time to fit around the schedule. If an assignment’s due date clashed, I just ensured my assignment was completed and submitted earlier, which is good practice, anyway.

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition? And how did you overcome it?

An unexpected aspect of the competition was the different judging styles. Some judges would bombard you with questions whereas others would rarely interrupt you. For the judges that would always ask you questions, sometimes those questions would lead you away from your argument. To overcome this, we had to learn to take control of the questions and lead the judge instead of being led by them.

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development? Especially throughout your first year of studies.

The competition has significantly helped me improve my confidence in public speaking and research skills. These are imperative skills that will be required throughout my degree and into my career, so having a head start in improving and applying these skills in a mock court environment is very helpful.

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate(s) were operating efficiently?

We would allocate time at least twice a week to work collaboratively on a call or in person, on any task that needed completion. This allowed us to stay on track with what needed to be done so that nothing was forgotten. Additionally, we would make checklists to ensure everything that needed to be completed was completed.

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a first-time competitor?

You only need to read a case once. Once you have read it (and taken notes), in future rounds, use keywords to search the case as opposed to reading the whole case again. It is a massive time saver and allows you to find supporting, or opposing, arguments much faster, whilst refreshing your memory on the case.

learn to take control of the questions lead the judge instead of being led by them.

2022 Foundations Law Moot Champions

NOVICE MOOT

OVERALL COMMITMENT: MODERATE COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Commitment must be highly consistent as there must be time allocated to extensive legal research (case law, legislation etc), practising and finalising oral and written submissions.

Pre-requisites:

• Second-year or above LLB/JD Student who has not competed in Moots before and has not done Foundations of Law Moot

• Teams consistent of 2-4 students, with 2 students being counsel and the other instructing solicitors

GRAND FINAL WINNER

Amelia Dorey

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

I’ll be honest, I came into this competition fairly unprepared! I knew that I wanted to try mooting before the end of my degree but I didn’t even know what a moot entailed, just that others had sung its praises and labelled mooting critical to career development. All I did in terms of preparation was watch a Harvard Moot on YouTube — my teammates really carried me in the beginning haha!

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

As this semester was my last, with all my units being law units, I had to ensure my grades remained a priority. This meant that balancing my moot preparation and competition rounds with study and other commitments wasn’t easy — especially as we had assumed that we would be eliminated in the early rounds, just in time for mid-sem assessments. I found that the moot, though timeconsuming, actually spurred me on in my studies. On top of preparing together, my mooting team also studied together, keeping each other accountable for our assessments. Essentially, we managed by working hard together!

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

While the workload was a lot and we hadn’t expected to progress to the final rounds (with the competition, therefore, stretching the entire semester), the most

The competition is broken up into two questions. During the preliminary rounds, competitors are presented with a Criminal law question and during the final rounds, competitors are presented with a Contract question.

difficult aspect was easy team communication. We came into this competition as friends who were very familiar with one another, but even so, working together as a team presented a new challenge. This experience of balancing friendship with ‘business’ will inevitably help us in our future careers.

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

This competition was huge for me, professionally and personally. While mooting obviously looks good on your CV, it was much more than that for me. This moot reignited my love in the law and sparked an interest in court advocacy! It has potentially altered my future career plans and that excites me.

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate(s) were operating efficiently?

Three tools were key to our smooth operation: our group chat, our shared Google doc, and videocalls (if we weren’t able to meet in person)! The centrality of these tools is just a testament to how important it is that everyone is on the same page, with clear and regular communication being the main facilitator of that.

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a firsttime competitor?

A moot is simply meant to be a conversation between the bench and counsel you want, albeit a formal one. Therefore, it’s best to go in without a script (you just have to know your stuff) and be prepared for lots of questions!

“It’s best to go in without a script! (you just have to know your stuff!)”

“A moot is simply meant to be a conversation between the bench and counsel you want, albeit a formal one.”

The Novice Moot is the perfect competition for students who are in their second-year or higher that have not competed in previous mooting competitions. This competition is an introduction to mooting and is great for students to gain experience before they graduate.

GRAND FINAL WINNER

Jaeyoung

Kim

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

Before the competition even started, I prepared by watching some moots. I went to see the Championships Grand Final Moot which helped me understand the formalities and procedures of a moot. It really helped me ease into my first competition and what to expect from it.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

Throughout the competition period, we all had difficulties finding and making time to work on the moot together. We typically met up in-person a day before the actual competition day to talk things through, and the rest was during our own time. I personally was studying four law units, working, engaging in student societies, volunteering, and on top of that, preparing for the moot. I found that being lazy or procrastinating wasn’t an option for me, so I ensured to use my time diligently and effectively (while taking breaks, of course).

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

The most difficult (and unexpected) aspect of the competition was team communication. We learned that communication within the team was one of the most — if not the most — important thing when it comes to a moot. Lack of communication really hindered our team dynamic and collaboration, but thankfully, we were able to talk things through, set our expectations in regards to communication, and slowly our communication skills got better.

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

In my opinion, mooting is a big green flag when it comes to job applications. Every interview I have had since participating in the moot has asked me about my experience during the moot. I believe this is because mooting is much more than just a mock trial. When you participate in a moot, you learn how to work in teams, how to resolve conflict, how to manage multiple tasks at once, how to do legal research, how to take criticism and learn from it, and much more. These were all beneficial to my professional and even personal development, as job recruiters look for these skills in their applicants.

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate(s) were operating efficiently?

Our team was able to operate efficiently by allocating equal distribution of work. It really helps with team morale and team efficiency if everyone does equal amounts of work. Often times, however, this was not the case for us. If one person had more capacity than another person, then they usually took on additional work — but when this happens (and is likely to happen) it’s always best to acknowledge and thank that person for carrying a bit more workload.

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a first-time competitor?

One tip I wish I knew as a first-time competitor was that — despite all the law TV shows and movies — speaking in front of a judge is not about who can speak the loudest, or the most confidently or arrogantly. It was quite the opposite. We found that those who spoke the most respectfully and slowly (and with a warm tone) were the ones that spoke the best. Of course, being confident is always good since it shows that you know what you are talking about, but being respectful to the judge is more important.

2022 Novice Moot Champions

“It’s not about who can speak the loudest, the most confidently or arrogantly — those who speak the most respectfully and slowly speak the best.”

“communication within the team is one of the most important things in a moot.”

THE INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW MOOT

OVERALL COMMITMENT: MODERATE TO HIGH COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Commitment must be highly consistent as there must be time allocated to extensive legal research (case law, legislation etc), practising and finalising oral and written submissions.

Pre-requisites:

• Completing or completed LAWS2000: International Law

• Completed Foundation of Law

Moot or Novice Moot

• Teams consistent of 2-4 students, with 2 students being counsel and the other instructing solicitors

GRAND FINAL WINNER

Sami Shamsi

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

This moot is rather unique since it focuses upon an area of international law, and requires extensive research at the start to understand the topic area. In particular, I found a substantial amount of time being allocated towards understanding existing case law relevant to this area of law, alongside researching the relevant international instruments which are key to building one's arguments. I found working alongside teammates to allocate sections of research the best way to cover our bases and manage our time effectively.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

Depending on the number of competitions you do, I find the best way is to regularly put in time towards your competitions to stay on top of it all. This may be working on your submissions once every few days, or working on preparation for a competition every night for an hour, as it helps maintain a regular approach and avoid any last-minute rushes.

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

Since international law has existed for an extensive time period, there is an abundance of precedent

With a focus on international criminal law, students are likely to engage with topics such as war crimes, crimes against humanity or conduct during armed conflict. This competition is perfect for students who want to challenge themselves and get a taste of other prestigious international law competitions such as the Phillip C. Jessup International Law Moot Competition.

from international courts (such as the International Criminal Court or ad hoc tribunals) which may be relevant to that area of law. I found researching into and understanding this case law to be the most time consuming element of this competition, but also the most rewarding, as reading the individual case judgements undoubtedly helped bolster and differentiate my arguments.

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

I believe this competition further developed my understanding of international humanitarian law through the research process required for this moot which I found invaluable.

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate(s) were operating efficiently?

As a team, we set regular deadlines for research and preparation of submissions to ensure we kept on track and efficiently worked towards goals. We also embraced a collaborative approach in proofing each other's research and speeches throughout.

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a firsttime competitor?

I wish I knew the importance of being confident in your abilities and knowing the relevant law well. Speaking confidently to judges knowing you can answer any question thrown at you, is all you need.

“Know the importance of being confident in your abilities and knowing the relevant law well.”

The International Humanitarian Law Moot is a perfect opportunity for students who have completed LAWS2000, International Law, and wish to expand and challenge their knowledge through the practical application of mooting. In its second year the IHL allows participants to practice legal research of fundamental treaties, customs, responding to complex legal arguments and general concepts of international law.

SUBJECT-BASED MOOTS

1.

CONTRACT

AND CRIMINAL LAW MOOT

OVERALL COMMITMENT: MODERATE TO HIGH COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Commitment must be highly consistent as there must be time allocated to extensive legal research (case law, legislation etc), practising and finalising oral and written submissions.

Pre-requisites:

• Opening to all LLB or JD Student with prior mooting experience

• Completing or compeleted LAWS1200: Contracts (Contract Law Moot) or LAWS1300: Criminal Justice (Criminal Law Moot)

Teams consistent of 2-4 students, with 2 students being counsel and the other instructing solicitors

MULS’ subject-based moots are designed to provide a challenging yet rewarding experience for students wishing to develop their written and oral advocacy skills.

The competitions focus on specific areas of law, such as criminal law and contract law, which allows participants to put into practice the knowledge and skills they have learnt within core units of their

2022 WINNER OF THE CRIMINAL LAW MOOT

Farrah Mikhail

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

Our preparation consisted of researching the law, drafting our written submissions and practising our oral submissions. We spent most of the time leading up to the first couple of rounds working on our written submissions and making sure that we understood all aspects of the relevant law properly. Then, in the lead up to the final rounds, we spent most of the time improving small parts based on feedback, and coming up with ways to respond to the other teams' submissions.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

I naturally find myself prioritising mooting competitions as I find them a lot of fun. However, to manage my time appropriately, I made an effort to work on it consistently for short periods at a time in the couple of weeks leading up to the due date for written submissions.

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

The most difficult aspect was managing our time well. I hadn't competed in a criminal moot before and so I was not very familiar with the material, and my teammates hadn't competed in a moot before, so there was a lot to learn in a short period of time.

law degree. These moots also provide competitors with an opportunity to work with other high achieving law students and network with legal professionals. While all students are eligible to compete, these competitions are ideal for students who have prior mooting experience.

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

This competition has helped me adopt a stronger logical and analytical approach to legal issues. The feedback each round helped me understand what sort of arguments are received well.

5. What is one tip you wish you knew as a firsttime competitor?

I wish I understood that I don't have to, and it is best not to, answer questions from judges quickly. In the middle of a moot, you can feel pressured to rush your answer to get it over with. However, it is best to take as much time as necessary to properly consider the question to make sure you give an effective answer in a calm manner.

“It is best to take as much time as necessary to properly consider the question to make sure you give an effective answer in a calm manner.”

2022 CRIMINAL LAW MOOT GRAND FINALIST

Sharni

Selzer

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

In preparation for the Criminal Law Moot, we carefully read the hypothetical, noted key issues, researched relevant cases and legislation and drafted a rough outline of how we would approach the moot. We allocated a couple of hours per week after class to brainstorm ideas and then refined our arguments individually.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

I definitely kept a very structured diary — at times it felt like my life was planned out to the minute. My work, volunteering the MULS executive commitments were my priority and I had to just let my moot preparation fill the gaps. If I was waiting somewhere, I would be reading a case, if I was on the train, I would be tearing apart the opposition’s written response.

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

The Criminal Law Moot was the first moot I competed in after the Foundations of Law Moot. The most unexpected part of the competition was competing against older and more experienced students, some of whom had even judged me in my previous moot! I overcame my initial nerves and performed much better than I thought I would.

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

This competition has aided me in my professional development by providing me with the opportunity to hone my mooting skills. It helped me to realise that I love the adrenaline rush that comes from being put on the spot and challenged to defend my argument. The competition also enabled me to meet so many wonderful like-minded people who have encouraged me in my studies and mooting.

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate(s) were operating efficiently?

To ensure our team was operating efficiently, we made sure to delegate tasks and set appropriate time limits. Clearly establishing expectations from the start of the moot saves a headache later on!

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a first-time competitor?

One tip I would give to a first-time competitor is to be overprepared rather than under-prepared. Complete case summaries, have the relevant legislation on hand and be sure every single argument you have is supported by fact and law. Your judges may ask you specific questions about a reference. Knowing the answer and being sure of it separates a good mooter from an average mooter.

2021 Criminal Law Moot Grand Finals

“Be over-prepared rather than under-prepared. Complete case summaries, have the relevant legislation on hand and be sure every single argument you have is supported by fact and law.”

2. DIVERSITY/PRIDE MOOT

OVERALL COMMITMENT: MODERATE TO HIGH COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Commitment must be highly consistent as there must be time allocated to extensive legal research (case law, legislation etc), practising and finalising oral and written submissions.

Pre-requisites:

• Opening to all LLB or JD Student with prior mooting experience

• Teams consistent of 2-4 students, with 2 students being counsel and the other instructing solicitors

The Diversity and Pride Moot has returned for a third year, reflecting MULS’ ongoing commitment to equality and representation throughout our society and its initiatives. This competition will be hosted with a focus on issues affecting the LGBTQIA+ community. Areas of law touched by this competition may include workplace discrimination, marriage and relationships, and family law.

This competition is a great stepping stone towards competing at an intervarsity level, with the Australian National University hosting an intervarsity Gender Identity and Sexuality Moot in September each year which is opening to law schools across Australia and New Zealand.

WINNER OF THE 2022 DIVERSITY/PRIDE MOOT

Jaz Cremen

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

The problem question kindly gave us some recommended readings, so I started by reading those. I then did some more basic research (Halsbury’s Laws of Australia on LexisNexis is the best resource) and started drafting our submissions. As for time allocation, I largely used my spare time to draft the written submissions and my oral submissions.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

Like all university commitments, scheduling is vital. I have a calendar where all my commitments, including due dates for written submissions and the date and time of each round are clearly set out and I can plan accordingly.

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

Reading the question for the first time and finding out it was on family law! I had no prior family law knowledge. However, this is one of the joys of mooting — getting to learn about an area of law that is entirely new to you.

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

Going into any area of law, team work and research skills are important. Mooting is a great way to develop these skills whilst you are at university. Advocacy skills are also very important, even if you don’t want a career in advocacy. This is because the ability to speak and write clearly is important in all career paths.

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate(s) were operating efficiently?

I was in a team of four, so we divided into pairs and worked on one problem each. I recommend a shared Word document for drafting your submissions so you all keep your formatting consistent and can see what each other has written. I was lucky to be on a team of seasoned mooters, so I could just trust that everyone was doing their part!

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a firsttime competitor?

Practice moots are probably the most important form of preparation you can do.

2022 Diversity/Pride Moot Champions

3. PRIVATE LAW MOOT

OVERALL COMMITMENT: MODERATE TO HIGH COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Commitment must be highly consistent as there must be time allocated to extensive legal research (case law, legislation etc), practising and finalising oral and written submissions.

Prerequisites:

• Opening to all LLB or JD Student with prior mooting experience

• Teams consistent of 2-4 students, with 2 students being counsel and the other instructing solicitors

In previous years, MULS has hosted the Tort Law Mooting Competition to give students an opportunity to experience an aspect of Private Law advocacy beyond Contract Law.

In recognition of student interest, MULS is transforming the Tort Law Competition into a Private Law Moot. This will expand the areas of law that may be explored to include Equity and Trusts and Corporate Law. The Private Law Moot will have a strong commercial focus and require students to grapple with challenging points of appeal.

This competition is perfect for more senior students wishing to tackle more complex factual scenarios and in depth legal research.

Similar to other subject moots, Preliminary rounds will be hosted online fortnightly and the finals will be hosted in person during Semester Two.

2022 Private Law Moot Winners

CHAMPIONSHIP MOOT

OVERALL COMMITMENT: HIGH COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Commitment must be highly consistent as there must be time allocated to extensive legal research (case law, legislation etc), practising and finalising oral and written submissions.

Pre-requisites:

• Opening to all LLB or JD Student with prior mooting experience

• Teams consistent of 2-4 students, with 2 students being counsel and the other instructing solicitors

Competitors can be questioned on various areas of law such as, contract law, criminal law, tort law, constitutional law ect. This competition is only available to those who have demonstrated previous experience and will run in Semester Two, 2023.

2022 WINNER OF CHAMPIONSHIP MOOT

Joshua Gracie

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

In order to prepare for the championship moot, my team undertook thorough research of the relevant case and statute law, constructed detailed written submissions, and prepared and practiced oral submissions. The preparation process, from receiving the question through to final preparations prior to the opening round, spanned multiple weeks, which consequently made it essential to plan ahead and set targets to ensure work was spread equitably across the weeks and all deadlines were met.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

Difficulty in balancing mooting with other commitments, including work and study, can be a considerable barrier to those seeking to participate in mooting. However, our team sought to manage this balance by splitting the preparatory work between teammates according to how busy each teammate was in the weeks leading up to the competition.

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

The most difficult aspect of the moot was the question. The Championship Moot question, as a non-subject specific moot, could concern a broad range of legal topic areas. The question our team was faced with concerned a specific and difficult area of administrative law. Despite the difficultly of the question however, our team derived great satisfaction from formulating

strong legal arguments to address the question, and developed skills and knowledge in doing so.

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

The Championship Moot, along with all other competitions I have taken part in significantly developed my professional skills. The formulation of written submissions has cultivated my legal research and writing skills, whilst the preparation of oral submissions together with taking part in the moot has developed strong oral communication skills. Mooting also develops crucial soft skills such as teamwork, critical thinking, analytical and interpersonal communication.

5. What is one tip you wish you knew as a firsttime competitor?

Whilst it may seem daunting as a first-time competitor, given the speaking times and the amount of content you hope to get through, I would suggest against writing a speech for your oral submission and instead preparing some points so that you’re ready to have an sophisticated conversation with the judges. This gives you the best opportunity to address the specific issues the judges may have with your case and also assist you in meeting time limits.

The Championship Moot is aimed at students who have demonstrated success in mooting and are looking to engage in a mooting competition of a higher level.

2022 Championship Moot Winners

MOOTING SAMPLE SUBMISSION

IN THE NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

KEY: BLUE - GENERAL COMMENTS

RED - IMPORTANT

GREEN - FORMATTING

BETWEEN:

RESPONDENT’S SUBMISSIONS

COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT:

Senior Counsel: J Smith SC (20 minutes)

Junior Counsel: S Johnson JC (20 minutes)

Instructing Solicitor: T Williams

Part I: Orders Sought

The respondent respectfully requests that:

(i) The appeal be dismissed.

(ii) The jury’s verdict of Miss Pink as guilty of murder be upheld.

MISS PINK

Appellant -AND

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Part II: Summary of Agreed Facts

A. After knowing each other for approximately two years, a disagreement arose between the appellant and the deceased in January 2016.

B. At the request of the deceased, the appellant visited his apartment on 20 January 2016. The appellant claimed that the deceased threatened to kill him.

C. Within the next five days, the appellant purchased a firearm and kept it underneath the driver ’s seat of his car.

D. On 25 January 2016, the appellant arranged a meeting between himself and the deceased. The appellant gave evidence that the deceased and two other men approached him, armed with a handgun, knife and baseball bat.

E. The appellant claimed that he was beaten by the three men. He then heard ‘shoot him, shoot him’ followed by a death threat. He claimed to have seen the deceased reach for his right pocket where he’d seen him put his gun earlier

F The appellant then retrieved his own gun and shot the deceased. The coroner ’s report determined that the deceased was shot five times at point blank range.

G. Witness statements regarding the timing of the shots were varied.

H. The appellant was convicted of murder pursuant to s 18(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).

Part III: Outline of Submissions:

Submission 1: The Crown negated self-defence beyond reasonable doubt.

1. The crown negates self-defence if it proves BRD that: Crimes Act (NSW) s 418-21; R v Katarzynski [2002] NSWSC 613 [22] (Howie J) (‘Katarzynski’); Aballah v The Queen [2016] NSWCCA 34 [61] (Meagher JA, R A Hulme, Bellew JJ (‘Abdallah No 1’)

a. The accused did not believe his conduct was necessary to defend himself; and

b. The action he took was not a reasonable response to the situation as he perceived it.

2. A subjective analysis of the first limb considering the whole of the circumstances draws the inference that the appellant did not believe his actions were necessary

a. The appellant arranged the meeting with a premeditated intent to harm the deceased which exists throughout the incident: Colosimo & Ors v DPP (NSW) [2006] NSWCA 293 [19](4) (Hodgson JA) (‘ Colosimo’) referencing Zecevic v DPP (1987) 162 CLR 645, 663 (Mason CJ, Wilson, Brennan, Dawson & Toohey JJ) (‘Zecevic’).

i. The appellant purchased a firearm specifically for the use on the deceased, brought it to the meeting he initiated and left the car door open for easy access.

ii. There had been a disagreement between the appellant and the deceased.

iii. The appellant initiated the meeting despite having experienced the deceased’s aggressive nature.

iv The appellant decided to remain at the scene as the three armed men approached.

b. The threat facing the appellant was not imminent as he did not see the deceased retrieve or point the gun at him. The lack of interference as he reaches into his car further reduces the imminence: R v Rogers (1996) 86 A Crim R 542, 545-6 (Gleeson CJ).

c. It would have been in the appellant’s periphery to see whether the deceased was pointing the gun at him once he returned from the car The lack of such

detail in his evidence draws the inference that the gun was not pointing at him. Therefore, the appellant would have believed the risk had subsided.

d. The appellant stretching out his arm so that the gun was at point-bank range is inconsistent with a belief that he needed to shoot the deceased in self-defence. If such belief existed, he would have fired as soon as he was able to: Abdallah (No 1) [111].

e. The appellant had previously been subject to death threats from the deceased that were not followed through: Barber v DPP [2021] NSWDC 7 [21] (Abadee DCJ).

3. An objective assessment of the proportionality of his response to the situation as he perceived it infers that it was not reasonably necessary

a. There were other responses open to the appellant, such as taking shelter in his car: R v Abdallah (No 2) NSWSC 1515 [242] (Rothman J).

b. Although the appellant is not expected to weigh precisely the exact measure of self-defensive action required, shooting the appellant five times at point-blank range is well beyond any reasonable necessity for defence, making it disproportional to the risk posed: Abdallah (No 1) [98]; Zecevic 662 (Wilson, Dawson and Toohey JJ).

c. This is furthered by the fact that neither the deceased nor the other two men retaliated at all during the course of the appellant shooting the deceased five times.

Submission 2: The jury reached a reasonable verdict as the evidence provided was sufficient to prove the appellant’s guilt BRD.

4. The setting aside of a jury’s verdict on the ground that it is unreasonable is a serious step, not to be taken without regard to the advantage enjoyed by the jury over a court of appeal which has not seen or heard the witnesses. The jury’s advantage is of considerable significance in a case where there is conflicting evidence: R v Baden-Clay (2016) 258 CLR 308 [65] (French CJ, Kiefel, Bell, Jeane & Gordon JJ); MEN v WA [2020] WASCA 118 [407] (Quinlan CJ & Beech JA); Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) s 6(1).

5. Appeals such as this proceed on the assumption that evidence is assessed by the jury to be credible and reliable: Pell v The Queen [2020] HCA 12 [39], [44].

6. The recognition that an acquittal was available on one view of the evidence does not mean that the verdict of guilty was not open on the same body of evidence: El Badawi v The Queen [2021] NSWCCA 196 [94] (Campbell J).

7. To establish that the verdict was unreasonable and not supported by evidence, the appellant must establish that:

a. The jury must, as distinct from might, have entertained a doubt about the appellant’s guilt; and: Abdallah No 1 [105]; Libke v The Queen (2007) 230 CLR 559 [113] (Hayne J).

b. Any doubt experienced by the court today could not have been resolved by the jury’s advantage: M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487, 494 (Mason CJ, Deane, Dawson & Toohey JJ).

8. It was open to the jury to accept Mr Orange’s evidence and find that a delay had occurred. Any doubt that the court finds today could be resolved by the jury’s advantage:

a. Mr Orange’s evidence is consistent with the appellant’s evidence regarding the chase of Mr Green and Mr Red. It is also consistent with the coroner ’s report regarding the number of shots fired.

b. Although Mr Orange was intoxicated, it is unlikely that his state would alter his experience of the events so greatly that he experiences a significant pause where there were none. This is especially so given that he recalled the abovementioned elements correctly.

c. Mr Orange was a retired police officer and would have been exposed to similar situations during his career, thus increasing his ability to deduce the events that took place.

d. Mr Orange was confident in his recall of the events, as opposed to Mr Purple who admitted he may have been mistaken and Miss Yellow who contradicted her own evidence.

e. Therefore, it was plainly open to the jury to rely on Mr Orange’s evidence to find that there had been a delay.

9. A delay between the first three and the latter two shots establishes the basis for the jury to determine that the appellant did not engage in self-defence: Abdallah No 1 [118].

10. In the alternative, if the court is of the opinion a doubt ought to have been experienced regarding the timing of the shots which cannot be resolved through the jury’s advantage, it was open to the jury to rely on the appellant’s evidence to preclude self-defence: Abdallah No 1 [117], [121], [122].

WITNESS EXAMINATION

OVERALL COMMITMENT: MODERATE COMMITMENT

Preparation time: This time includes research into the key rules of evidence and its relevant sections, practising and identifying the holes in your arguments (possible objections), preparing the witness

Pre-requisites:

• Opening to all LLB or JD Student

• Completed or Completing LAWS3400 (Evidence)

• No team, each competitor must prepare for and complete individually

The Witness Examination (WitEx) Competition provides students with the opportunity to act as a barrister in a civil or criminal trial. It involves a shortened version of all the main components of a real trial; opening statements, examination in chief, cross-examination, and closing arguments.

Competitors are randomly allocated either the prosecution or defence side and provided a witness who will receive a witness statement prior to the commencement of the round.

STRUCTURE

Competitors are required to think on their feet, utilising witness testimonies to present a clear and consistent case based on the available evidence.

Competitors are required to balance the duties of establishing credibility for their own witness and extracting further beneficial evidence, whilst attempting to convey the inconsistencies of the opposing witness during cross-examination.

Prior to the round starting competitors will be privy to a set of witness statements and the relevant law applicable to the trial. Competitors will also be presented in an opportunity to brief their witness for the trial.

Grand Final Rounds

Examination-in-chief by the Prosecution

Cross-examination by the Defence

Opening by the Defence

Cross-examination by the Prosecution

Summation by the Prosecution

Summation by the Defence

TIPS AND TRICKS

It is recommended that competitors focus on developing a strong case theory, ensuring that it is persuasive and plausible given the evidence provided by witnesses. Consider the fact that your opponent is seeking to destroy the credibility of your theory and while the case theory can be developed slightly in response to the evidence provided by the witness, it should be minimal.

Preparation of the Witness:

Competitors should be careful that they are not ‘coaching’ the witness. The purpose of preparing the witness is to ensure they fully comprehend their involvement in the case. It is important to ask questions derived from the statement as well as information not necessarily provided, to assess your witness’s mindset and likely responses.

During Trial:

• Opening statements should be succinct, contain a summary of the facts, outline what needs to be proven, the relevant law and offer a general idea of what direction your argument will take.

• During examination-in-chief, utilise a natural conversational style to ensure the witness feels at ease while presenting their version of events and ensure you reinforce important details to increase a witness’s credibility. Use open-ended questions to facilitate the witnesses’ story, but do not encourage them to ramble or avoid the question.

• Questioning during cross-examination should be in a leading form, using questions which often only require the witness to reply in simple ‘yes’ or

‘no’ answers. The focus should be on attempting to discredit both the evidence that is damaging to your case theory and the witness themselves.

• The closing address focuses on summarising the entire case, with information extracted from both witnesses and the cross-examination conducted

• Re-emphasise your case theory and identify why what has come about during the trial, from both sides, supports your conclusion based on the evidence. Be clear and succinct as this will be the last impression you make to the bench.

JUDGING CRITERIA

Judges will mark competitors based on their:

• Opening and closing statement

• Examination-in-chief and cross-examination

• Ability to develop a case theory

• Manner and expression of their argument

• Knowledge and application of Evidence Law

2022 Witness Examination Grand Finals

PREPARATION FOR WITNESS EXAMINATION

• Prepare the Witness. This involves revising the facts of the scenario, practising questions asked during examination in chief, preparing the witness for cross examination and addressing any issue that may arise for witness statements. However, it is critical that you do not ‘coach’ your witness by providing them scripted answers or by encouraging them to change or invent new facts.

INITIAL PREPARATION

Due to the nature of the competition, preparation may vary from other competitions offered by MULS. First time competitors are advised to watch past recordings of grand final rounds to familiarise themselves with competition etiquette and operation.

BEFORE TRIAL

Competitors are provided the scenarios 3 hours during preliminary rounds, and 90 minutes before the commencement of the final rounds. Consequently, competitors should utilise this limited period of time to effectively process the witness statements provided, brief the witness and formulate their case for trial and identify key lines of questioning.

Competitors should:

• Develop their case. This involves carefully analysing the statements of both witness and formulating case theory — a narrative proposed to the court that is created around the your version of events. Case theory should be established in the opening arguments, extracting important facts from your witness statements to create a strong impression. Avoid complicated and convoluted narratives as this can create confusion with witnesses and prevent the bench from following your argument.

• Revise the relevant features of Evidence Law. This involves understanding which questions are permissible during examination, and how to object to questions and answers permissible under Evidence Law. After the introduction of case theory it is important to outline the law that is in contention with the relevant offence. The prosecution is responsible for introducing the charge, the relevant legislation and to outline the elements need to be satisfied for the conviction to be met. The opening should make express reference to the burden that must be discharged and why it is or is not met. The Defence as the counterpart should focus on the agreed elements and reference the differing standard of proof required.

DURING COMPETITION Appearances

• Present yourself to the court with the statement, ‘May it please the Court, my name is [full name] representing the prosecution/defence in the case of [case name].’

Examination in Chief

• Using the statement ‘I call [witness name] to the stand’ will summon your client to the stand.

• This occurs after opening statements and Cross Examination.

SUMMARY: KEY RULES OF EVIDENCE

• Procedural Fairness — Rule in Browne v Dunn

• Relevance — Evidence Act ss 55, 56.

• Hearsay Evidence — Evidence Act s 59

• Opinion Evidence — Evidence Act ss 76, 77, 78

• Character — Evidence Act ss 109, 110, 111 and 112.

• Leading the Witness (examination in chief only) — Evidence Act 37

• Evidence Illegally or Improperly Obtained- Evidence Act ss 137-9

• Badgering the Witness — Evidence Act s 41

Other Grounds for objection

• General, vague or non-specific questions

• Unintelligible or confusing questions

• Duplicitous questions

• Questions that assume facts not in evidence

• Questions that are argumentative, oppressive or irrelevant.

Due to the nature of the competition, preparation may vary from other competitions offered by MULS. First-time competitors are advised to watch past recording of grand final rounds to familarise themselves with competition etiquette and operation.

PROFESSIONAL SKILLS

PLEASE NOTE: The information provided is intended as a guide only and does not replace the Competitions Rules and Manuals. For understanding the Mooting Competition Rules and the nature of the Various Competition, please refer to https://www.muls.org/ competitions-resources.

WHAT IS PROFESSIONAL SKILLS?

Professional Skills Competitions are designed to help law students build all of the necessary legal skills that don’t involve trial advocacy. The competitions that fall under this banner include Client Interview, Negotiations, Paper Presentation and Alternative Dispute Resolution. Participating in professional skills is a great way to develop a rounded skill set which will greatly develop your interpersonal communication and diplomacy.

CLIENT INTERVIEW

OVERALL COMMITMENT: LOW COMMITMENT

Preparation time:

It is not as intensive as mooting. Preparation time includes (but is not limited to) practicing active listening, including formalities, role playing.

Pre-requisites:

• No prior experience necessary.

• Junior Client Interview: Must be in first or second year for LLB/JD equivalent.

• Senior Client Interview: Must be third and above year for LLB/JD equivalent.

• Each team shall consist of two students.

The Client Interview competition focuses on the process of conducting an effective interview and extracting useful information from the client, whilst acting in the professional capacity of a lawyer.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

1. Leading up to the interview, all competitor teams would receive an Office Memorandum which would briefly describe the client’s problem in one to two sentences.

2. On the date of rounds, teams conduct client interviews.

3. The teams would be required to use their listening, questioning and practical thinking skills to extract information that is withheld by the client and to show a broad understanding of the problem that can be used to present alternative solutions.

4. After the conclusion of the Client Interviews, teams will assess their overall performance and identify their strengths and weaknesses while conducting a postinterview consultation with the judges.

5. Following both teams’ consultation with the judges, judges present the outcome of the round as well as constructive feedback to improve your interview skills.

6. This process will happen for each round of the competition and the teams with the best scores would proceed to quarterfinals, semi-finals and grand finals.

HOW TO PREPARE

P P P P P

Practice small talk.

Familiarise yourself with the Memorandum and how you would conduct the interview.

Brainstorm some questions to ask your client.

Practice with your partner.

Research alternate ways to resolve situations from different areas of law e.g. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).

TIPS AND TRICKS JUDGING CRITERIA

Practice with your partner to ensure you and your partner know which aspects of the interview you will each be covering. You can divide the interview as:

• Small talk, ice-breaking and introductions to build a rapport with the client.

• Identification of the client’s problem and goals for the interview.

• Questioning the client to gather information and gain access to withheld information — use open and closed questions but ask them in a structured and logical way.

• Discuss alternative ways of resolution.

• Closing and summarising — make sure your client knows what their and your next steps are.

The judges are provided with a specific criterion where they will assess you on your:

• Teamwork

• Ability to establish a rapport with the client.

• Ability to identify your client’s problem.

• Ability to deal with moral and ethical issues.

• Ability to provide alternative courses of action.

• Awareness of your strengths and weaknesses.

2022 Senior Client Interview

PLEASE NOTE: The information provided is intended as a guide only and does not replace the Competitions Rules and Manuals. For understanding the Mooting Competition Rules and the nature of the Various Competition, please refer to https://www.muls.org/ competitions-resources.

The Consultation with the Client (The Interview)

• The first 30 minutes are devoted to a consultation during which the teams are expected to elicit the relevant information, outline the problem and propose a solution or other means of resolving the problem.

• Remember, you must make the client feel welcome. Be conscious that you do not want your voice or body language to come off as intimidating.

• With voice, speak with a consistent pace and if needed, slow down so that the client understands what you are saying. If you were to speak fast, this would be perceived as you trying to get this over with, rather than understand and empathise with the client.

• Remember to speak plain English! The client will not have the same understanding of the law and its jargon as you will.

Post-Consultation (The Wrap up)

• The judges will ask the competitor to leave the room, so the judge can ask the client about their experience with the team.

• Once the five minutes is over, you will be invited back into the room and client will leave.

1. Introduction and Formalities

5 MINS

Include:

• Your name and your teammate’s name

• Your role

• Small talk / ice breaking to build rapport

• Aim for today

• State that everything that is said during the course of the interview will be private and confidential

3. Information Gathering and Providing Solutions

11 MINS

Include:

• Now that the problem has been identified, gather the information necessary to begin the resolution of the client’s problem.

• Once you are provided the facts and information, try and provide solutions (legal and non-legal) that client can take as the next step.

• For body language, avoid fidgeting with your hands or with anything in front of you as you want to show the client, your full undivided attention.

• Body language to include is maintaining eye contact, shaking your head when they are explaining to you their problem, shifting your body in their direction so they know you are focused on them.

• Remember to address the preliminary formalities including:

• Your names and your role

• Outlining that your goal for today is to help understand how they can help you.

• State that everything that is said during the course of the interview will be private and confidential.

Critique

• For five minutes, the judge will ask you questions about your performance to assist them decide who should win the competition.

2. Initial Problem Identification

11 MINS

Include:

• Use open ended questions, active listening, structural guides to encourage a client to continue describing the problem.

• Conclude this section by summarising the client’s problem.

4. Conclusion

3 MINS

Include:

• Confirm everything your team and client have went through.

• Identify any uncertainties / anything you didn’t go through just yet.

• State the actions that will be undertaken by the solution and what will be done by the client to avoid any miscommunication and builds client confidence.

DO’S R DON’T’S W

• Do your research. You may want to watch finals of client interviews on youtube to see how you would need to present yourself, or you may to read certain guides and websites to help best prepare for the round.

• Do add post-meeting next steps at the end of the interview. At the end, you must clearly communicate what each party will do moving forward.

• Do show that you empathise with the client’s circumstances. Acknowledge how the client feels, whether that be confirmation, expressed reassurance or shifting your body to them, enhances the client’s feelings of trust and confidence in the interviewer and engaged the client to participate more.

• Do practice your active listening skills. This is crucial to building rapport with your client and this can include clarifying information provided, paying attention to what is being said and remove any distractions.

• Do achieve a balanced approach. It is important to be accommodating and professional to your client but you also need to make sure that you encourage the client to provide as much information (without pressuring them) so your team can understand and generate some options.

2021 JUNIOR CLIENT INTERVIEW COMPETITION WINNER

Claire Cottrell-Dormer

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

Heidi and I undertook extensive preparation prior to the commencement of the competition by researching relevant legislation and precedent. As a result, we were better prepared during our competition as we knew what to expect and were able to offer the appropriate legal solutions. In the days leading up to the competition, I allocated 30 minutes each day to familiarise myself with the legislation and come up with specific questions to ask the client. This made me feel more confident going into the competition.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

In order to manage my other commitments efficiently, I planned ahead and estimated how much time I would need to complete my tasks. This enabled me to become more efficient with my time and helped me to decide which tasks should be prioritised. Further, keeping busy allowed me to minimise procrastination and enhanced my ability to manage my time well.

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

The most challenging part was adapting our advice to the client’s circumstances. There are times when our advice needs to change unexpectedly. For instance, if the client informed us that they attended a NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) but were unsuccessful, we would need to consider other alternatives.

• Don’t interrupt the client when they are speaking. Let the client speak as much as they want. To show that you are listening, you may want to take notes.

• Don’t ask multiple questions at once. Multiple will likely confuse the client and may potentially lead to missing important information.

• Don’t disregard the client’s feelings. Acknowledge that it may be difficult to reveal certain sensitive information.

• Don’t be limited to taking one course of action. Providing multiple options that are legal and non-legal, will help you tailor the solutions to the client. You may to introduce non-legal solutions first, before the legal solutions.

• Don’t pressure the client to do anything. The client may have certain desires that may be different to how you would approach it. Your job is to make the client informed of all their choices.

Another challenge was that we needed to think quickly on our feet as there was a limited time frame.

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

This competition aided my professional development as it enabled me to develop my legal research skills, interpersonal skills and ability to provide the best solution for clients. To successfully represent the client, we needed to demonstrate that we understood the client’s needs, be able to extract all necessary information and be aware of any ethical issues. In the future, all of these skills will prove invaluable since dealing with clients is a key aspect of the legal profession.

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate(s) were operating efficiently?

To ensure that Heidi and I were operating efficiently, we communicated daily leading up to the competition. Further, we divided the research to ensure that the work was distributed evenly.

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a first-time competitor?

It is necessary to research legislation and precedents in order to gain a better understanding of the topic and help our clients reach the best possible outcome.

“All of these skills will prove invaluable since dealing with clients is a key aspect of the legal profession.”

“The most challenging part was adapting our advice to the client’s circumstances. There are times when our advice needs to change unexpectedly.”

NEGOTIATIONS

OVERALL COMMITMENT: LOW TO MODERATE COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Medium Commitment as preparation includes (but is not limited to) researching negotiations (BATNA, WATNA, Tips of focusing Interests and Positions etc.) practising with your partner, reading the hypothetical

Pre-requisites:

• Second year LLB (and JD).

• No experience in competing is necessary

• Each team shall consist of two members

Teams consisting of two students are assigned to a client with the aim of reaching an agreement, either tentative or binding, that best aligns with their respective client’s interest. This competition focuses on maintaining an effective working relationship, bargaining, and strategising.

HOW TO PREPARE

PKnow your facts.

Negotiation scenarios can be dense and filled with multiple issues and interests from both your client and the opposing teams. Reading the facts carefully and making notes can aid in understanding your client’s interests, their instructions and potential issues that may arise during the negotiation process. Having a detail orientated approach ensures teams can recall important information quickly and accurately which is essential to a successful negotiation.

PKnow your client.

During the negotiation process, teams are acting on the authority of their clients and as such, should have a firm understanding of the needs, interests and expectations that arise from this relationship. Whilst it is important that the client’s interest should be incorporated into the final outcome, it is important for teams to be flexible to the opposing counsel’s suggestions. Teams can take a variety of approaches, both traditional or creative, to achieve the right balance of pushing their client’s agenda and accepting some compromises.

Successful Agreements…

R R R R R

Meet the legitimate interests of all parties to the extent possible

Maximise benefits and minimise costs to all parties

Are a durable agreement

Define future cooperative interaction

Are achieved through a fair process

Each 50 min round consists of a unique scenario in which two teams composed of two students acting as solicitors seek to represent opposing clients in the matter. Both teams are privileged to a common document of facts that establishes the general dispute and a confidential document that contains information that is sensitive to the client’s respective teams. At the completion of the negotiation session, teams will have a short 10-minute reflective period before engaging in a 10-minute self-analysis. During this time, teams should discuss their performance and accept questions from the judge competition and the teams with the best scores would proceed to quarter-finals, semi-finals and grand finals.

PDevelop a negotiation strategy.

Whilst it is difficult to plan for every scenario, having a clear vision of what strategy to take can be critical to a great negotiation. Prioritising issues from most to the least important is one way to utilise the allotted time and ensure your client’s issues can be effectively discussed. However, each strategy will have its own strengths and weaknesses and it is up to teams to understand those risks and adapt within each round. Furthermore, strategising allows for teams to anticipate and cater for issues that the opposing team may introduce, allowing for a more substantial negotiation and rounded conclusion.

JUDGING CRITERIA

• Negotiation planning and strategy employed

• Adaptability to new information

• Overall outcome of the session

• Creativity of options presented

• The identification of interests

• Teamwork between members and with the opposing counsel

• Understanding of ethical and moral obligations

• Identification of team strengths and weaknesses

The Negotiations Competition replicates the negotiation process that usually occurs outside of the Courtroom before the litigation.

TIPS & TRICKS

01. 02. 04. 03.

Create summaries, tables and diagrams to keep track of different parties, conflicts and potential interest that might arise.

Be specific with your questioning to prevent wasting time and to draw out secret facts.

NEGOTIATIONS WINNER

Taylor McCoy

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

Negotiations is a special kind of competition where you will only get sent the scenario a week before the round, so not much preparation can be done before this. However in the week between when you get sent the scenario and the actual competition, it is definitely a task you need to allocate adequate time towards, I would usually have three to four preparation sessions with my teammate each lasting around 2—3 hours in the week leading up to the round.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

The workload of negotiations was very manageable, the rounds were every second week and once you do a couple of prep sessions, you start to get used to what you should be doing, so it was not too hard to still go through with other commitments on top of negotiations. However, this is not to say that the work was easy, it is still important to be proactive in getting the work done to the best of your ability.

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

How opponents would react to your strategies or demands. You never know what kind of opponents you are facing, sometimes they may be more demanding and disagreeable, sometimes they may be more openly cooperative and collaborative in reaching a

Negotiation is a marathon not a sprint — make sure you are appropriately using the time to discuss ALL issues present.

Provide a more cohesive and unified front by creating clear roles for your team members.

final solution. Navigating through these unseen challenges on the spot was definitely the most difficult aspect of the competition in my opinion.

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

The Negotiations competition has done so much in the development of my interpersonal skills. Not only do you have to work with your partner well in the preparation stage, but you also have to work effectively with the opposition to reach a solution that works best for both sides. I find that my collaborative skills have definitely improved along with my speaking ability and capability to act under pressure.

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate(s) were operating efficiently?

Both myself and my teammate were communicating on a regular basis and always asking the other if we had any concerns about an upcoming round or anything else. Also communicating when we were both available for preparation often made sure we could organise consistent prep sessions.

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a first-time competitor?

Don’t stress too much about getting the best deal possible. Whilst this is still an important aspect of the negotiation, the majority of the marks that can be awarded are based on not what happened but how it happened. The judge will be looking for things like how well you are communicating with your teammate and the opposition, how creative you were in generating different options and how well you explored the interests and needs of the opposition.

2021 Negotiations Competition

GRAND FINAL WINNER

Sophie Baxter

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

Negotiations competitions require much less preparation in comparison with competitions such as mooting, though it is still important that you enter the negotiation with a clear game plan. I would recommend team members first undertake independent consideration of the scenario, pulling out points of interest from the facts, brainstorming questions for the opposing team, and researching any legal issues. Then, discuss these ideas with your teammate and create a strategy for the negotiation. This will include determining your BATNA and WATNA as well as the points you are willing to concede and those that are ‘non-negotiable’ for your client. In all, this should only take a few hours.

While preparation is important, I would warn against over-preparing. In a negotiation, you need to be flexible and able to adapt to new information you receive from the opposing side. An overly prescriptive and inflexible strategy can stifle negotiations. The most important preparation you can do is to have a clear understanding of your client’s goals and keep these in mind at each point of the negotiation.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

Each round runs for roughly one hour and requires only a few hours of preparation. So as long as you and your partner set aside this time to prepare, I would say that the competition schedule is very manageable. However, I understand that balancing university, work, and other commitments with a competition can be stressful. It really is just a case of organising your time well and making sure you are preparing efficiently. I would suggest dividing research points with your partner and ensuring you do individual preparation prior to team discussion to reduce the preparation time required.

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

I think the most difficult, but definitely the most exciting, aspect of the competition is that you enter the negotiation not knowing the confidential information the opposing team has been given by their client. This means you need to begin discussions with an open mind and listen carefully to the information the other team provides. Some of this information will be harmful to your client, but some of it will also benefit them. It is important to think critically about the information provided and use it in a way that advances your client’s goals. This competition definitely teaches you to think on your feet!

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

As law students, we are often required to take on the role of a judge to find the ‘correct’ answer to a legal question, but this competition asks you to take a client-focused approach to the set of facts at hand. It is said that 90% of legal matters are settled out of court, so learning to advocate for a client in this environment is a vital skill in the legal profession. Participating in a competition which had this client focus significantly improved my ability to think critically under pressure and to express goal-oriented ideas clearly and concisely. I have learned how to advocate for a client and hold my ground while still maintaining a good rapport with the opposing team. Aside from professional development, the competition is a lot of fun. Working in a team and acting as a solicitor dealing with interesting (and often humorous) factual scenarios is, if nothing else, an exciting and enjoyable task.

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate were operating efficiently?

My partner and I ensured that prior to discussing each round’s set of facts, we had already read, considered, and researched the scenario independently. This firstly meant that we were not wasting the time we were able to schedule together developing only a basic understanding of the scenario. It also allowed us to consider the set of facts without being influenced by the other’s interpretation. We were then able to discuss our opinions and propose strategies during our team preparation time, which I believe was a much more efficient use of our time.

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a first-time competitor?

Do not be afraid to agree to something the opposing team asks for! Negotiations are not about making the opposing client suffer but are about ensuring that you provide your client with the best possible outcome for them, even if that means making some concessions and giving the opposing client something they want in the process. Just make sure you use that when you do make those concessions, you use them to your advantage.

In saying that, it is ok not to come to an agreement on each point of contention straight away or even at all. If you feel that discussion of a particular point is not being productive at that time, suggest to the other team that you move on and return to it later. Never feel the need to agree to something your client does not want just because you are running out of time. Outside of the competition environment, negotiations are usually not confined to a single one-hour discussion, so it is okay to leave the room without a settled outcome. Invite the opposing side to discuss the unresolved issues in a few days instead.

“Negotiations are not about making the opposing client suffer but are about ensuring that you provide your client with the best possible outcome for them.”

“It is important to think critically about the information provided and use it in a way that advances your client’s goals.”

PRINCIPLES OF INTEREST-BASED NEGOTIATIONS

Separate the people from the problem

• Participants should work side by side to attack the problem and not each other. Negotiate hard, not hard on the person.

•  It is your interest to identify the interests of other people.

• See the opposing team as your partner, not your enemy.

• Be soft on the people, hard on the problem. Proceed independent of trust.

Focus on the interests and not the positions

• Ascertain the interests that motivate the parties’ positions. Articulate those interests clearly.

• Explore interests and avoid having a bottom line

Identification of Interests

• Be VERY clear on what interests you want to have satisfied and want discussed in the negotiation.

• Also ask what the other party wants to have agreed on and what is preventing them from reaching an agreement.

• This will fashion solutions that advance common interests, reconcile differing interests and promote acceptable concessions and trade-offs.

Generate a variety of options for mutual gain

• Before agreeing, brainstorm a variety of alternatives that advance shared interests and creatively reconcile differing interests.

• Don’t develop one option that is the best option, develop multiple and then take the criteria and evaluate your options by the criteria to find the best option.

• By doing so, the solution found by other parties will be much more sustainable because they actually had a sense that they had a choice. Develop multiple options to choose from; decide later.

• Try to reach a result based on standards independent of will Reason and be open to reasons; yield to principle, not pressure.

• Considering options for settlement: It is important to develop a range of options that meet your parties’ interests but also the other parties’ interests.

Try to create packages of linked bargaining

• “I’m prepared to move on X if you are prepared to concede on X” For the client: Options can be expanded by brainstorming or problem-solving. Here’s a simplified process for problem solving

• Identify client’s objectives and priorities

• Develop possible solutions in a cooperative and nonjudgmental endeavour with the client

• Evaluate the possible options

• Obtain client instructions as to their preferred option

• Design detailed plans for implementing chose options

• If interests cannot be reconciled (even with trade-offs and concessions), use objective standards such as legal rules, norms, customs and expert opinions. If all else fails, consider tossing a coin.

Trick

for win-win — based on the interests first develop criteria

that a solution must fulfil

• What conditions would a good solution you could say yes to, fulfil?

• To give an example: imagine Person A wants to take Person B to a restaurant, but they want to make sure that the restaurant is one that Person B actually likes. So Person A would ask, ‘how would you realise if the restaurant is a good restaurant for you?’ Then Person B would say some conditions, eg. ‘small menu, certain quality of light.’

• In terms of the negotiations, we should set a criteria for Party A and Party B, and find a win-win solution that fulfils both.

Preparation undertaken

Bring a written but flexible plan that reflects the preparation undertaken. Some things to include:

• Possible interests of all parties

• Issues to be discussed (in their preferred order)

• BATNAs and WATNAs for all parties

• Possible trade-offs and concessions (ranked)

• Possible settlement options

• Team strategy

• Negotiation strategy (opening offer, tactics, endgame. Chess, basically.)

Ascertaining the BATNAs and WATNAs

• Parties must determine their best and worst alternatives to a negotiated agreement prior to negotiation so they can keep their options intact.

• When a party’s BATNA has been ascertained, the question to ask during negotiations is: “Does a particular proposal better satisfy my interests or are my interests better satisfied if I pursue my BATNA?”

• If they are better satisfied elsewhere, walk away. If not, probably accept.

• BATNAs can be thought of as a more flexible bottom line that can permit exploration of alternate solutions whilst protecting parties from accepting terrible agreements.

BATNAs are worked out in the following way:

1. Invent a list of actions you might conceivably take if no agreement is reached.

2. Improve some of the more promising ideas and convert them into practical alternatives.

3. Select (tentatively) the one option that seems best

Draft a risk analysis of a BATNA such as:

• The possible and probable outcome of litigation

• Details of likely delays until trial

• Length of possible trial

• Other likely delays

• Estimate of costs

• Estimate of time away from work and associated losses

• Emotional costs of litigation

Try, as precisely as possible, to determine the other party’s BATNAs and WATNAs. If you want to settle, you need to try and offer them something better than the best they can do elsewhere.

Insist that the result be based on some objective standard.

What if they won’t play?

Tips

from ‘From Getting

A Summary

a Yes’

by William Ury and Roger Fisher:

There are three basic approaches for focusing their attention on the merits:

• The first centres on what you can do. You yourself can concentrate on the merits, rather than on positions. This method, the subject of this book, is contagious; it holds open the prospect of success to those who will talk about interests, options, and criteria. In effect, you can change the game simply by starting to play a new one.

• The second strategy which focuses on what they may do. It counters the basic moves of positional bargaining in ways that direct their attention to the merits. This strategy we call negotiation jujitsu.

• The third approach focuses on what a third party can do. If neither principled negotiation nor negotiation jujitsu gets them to play, consider including a third party trained to focus the discussion on interests, options, and criteria. Perhaps the most effective tool a third party can use in such an effort is the onetext mediation procedure.

Negotiation Jujitsu

• Don’t attack their position, look behind it.

• When the other side sets forth their position, neither reject it nor accept it. Treat it as one possible option. Look for the interests behind it, seek out the principles which it reflects, and think about ways to improve it.

• Assume every position they take is a genuine attempt to address the basic concerns of each side; ask them how they think it addresses the problem at hand. Treat their position as one option and objectively examine the extent to which it meets the interests of each party, or might be improved to do so.

• Don’t defend your ideas, invite criticism and advice.

• A lot of time in negotiation is spent criticising. Rather than resisting the other side’s criticism, invite it. Instead of asking them to accept or reject an idea, ask them what’s wrong with it. ‘What concerns of yours would this salary proposal fail to take into account?’ Examine their negative judgments to find out their underlying interests and to improve your ideas from their point of view.

• Recast an attack on you as an attack on the problem. When the other side attacks you personally — as frequently happens — resist the temptation to defend yourself or to attack them. Instead, sit back and allow them to let off steam. Listen to them, show you understand what they are saying, and when they have finished, recast their attack on you as an attack on the problem.

COMMON MISTAKES

• Be VERY careful NOT to act on the basis of assumptions. Act on facts. If unsure of the facts, seek clarification!

• Discuss and agree on procedure FIRST. Don’t jump to substantive issues too quickly

• Don’t be too quick on the defensive and instead, ask why they’re doing what they’re doing. Learn your opponent, their position and interest.

• Don’t use closed questions inappropriately. Use open questions to elicit concerns and interests.

• Going circular with some issues.

• Where a point of discussion has run its course without an agreement coming to fruition, leave this point to the side and revisit the discussion at a later stage

• Not keeping an eye out for directional information. Without such information, you will not identify party’s preferences and priorities.

• Don’t make offers too quickly! If necessary, make tentative offers.

• Don’t go into the specifics of offers (such as dollar values) too quickly!

• Carefully evaluate alternatives.

• Avoid an overly aggressive or rigid approach.

• Failing to coordinate the activities of team members

• Members pushing conflicting personal agendas

• Disclosing disagreement to the other party (NEVER SHOW THEM YOU ARE NOT UNIFIED!)

Preliminary

3 minutes

WHAT TO INCLUDE

Introducing

Make sure you address the following:

• Confidentiality

• Good faith and without prejudice

• Binding agreement

This is where your team and the opposing team discusses each team’s agenda and goals for today

Each team has the opportunity to discuss what is in the client’s best interests. The identified interests are usually two that the team intends to talk about. This will include giving information and also being conscious of information to not disclose just yet. 15

15 minutes

Going through options on the table, we can go through and discuss these options and pick out the most appropriate one to help each party reach a mutually beneficial agreement.

Be aware of what your client can and cannot sacrifice.

Be prepared to justify your client’s position:

• Why this number?

• Why do you want this?

Try to decode any statements of position to identify and summarise underlying interest. Acknowledge the other party is heard. Attempt to determine the terms of the contract which will be agreed upon.

Sometimes, this may not even include having a binding agreement. You may need to go back to your client to ask questions the opposing team has raised.

Here’s a good phrase: ‘We may not have settled all the issues today but we’ve made some progress. I would like to take some time to consider my client’s position and we would like to do the same thing. Same time next week?’

PAPER PRESENTATION

OVERALL COMMITMENT: MODERATE TO HIGH COMMITMENT

Preparation time: High Commitment, as preparation time includes (but is not limited to) researching into the topic, finalising your submissions, practising oral submissions

Pre-requisites:

• No experience in competing is necessary

• Open to ALL YEARS, and you are welcome to submit a paper you have previously written. There are NO TOPIC RESTRICTIONS, so this is a great way to explore areas of the law you are passionate about.

The Paper Presentation is an individual competition that requires competitors to submit an academic paper on a legal agenda of choice, before presenting their findings to a panel of judges thereby providing an opportunity for students to strengthen legal research and writing skills whilst encouraging important discussions of relevant and contemporary legal issues.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

The competition is divided into two primary sections:

1. Written Submission (40 marks)

Papers must be between 2500 and 5000 words including any explanatory or substantive footnotes and must use the AGLC4 referencing style. The Submissions should be anonymised before being submitted. These submissions would be marked by a judge only responsible for assessing the written works and who would not be included in the oral judging panels.

HOW TO PREPARE Picking a Topic

2. Oral Presentation (40 marks)

Participants present their papers for a maximum of 15 minutes. This is followed by a 10-minute question period from the audience where questions regarding the material are covered. Oral presentations have a preliminary and Grand Final round. The winner is the participant with the highest total score from both submissions.

PParticipants are free to explore and choose a topic that they are passionate about to write an essay on, unlike a traditional assignment where the topics are already chosen. You can use a topic from a previous unit or a current controversial agenda that you find interesting, the main aim of this competition is to think critically about these issues. Being passionate about the topic will assist the participants in maintaining interest and motivation during the research process and the development of their written submissions.

PWriting an Essay

Writing an essay is not an easy task, however, identifying the main points of your argument can help you find suitable examples that support or disprove your arguments. I would recommend breaking the essay into smaller tasks that you can accomplish over time. Also, use headings and subheadings to give your essay a solid structure. This allows you to see your progress as well as focuses you on the essay, therefore avoiding any tangents that you might encounter.

POral Speech

Make it interactive with different pitches and tones to avoid sounding monotonous and make eye contact with people across the room. Make sure the speech is not your written submission by focusing only on your main points and key examples. Try to make it more engaging by highlighting the main points and examples but also include for and against arguments in the speech. You can also present in front of someone you know to get an idea of how you present yourself and your presentation in front of an audience. This can also have the added effect of getting questions that can help you better visualise other potential questions from the actual audience which will help you maintain composure during the oral speech.

2016 Paper Presentation

TIPS AND TRICKS JUDGING CRITERIA

Practice your speech by yourself and in front of an audience.

02.

03. 04. 05.

Use a pace that allows audience members to process and understand the information being presented.

Try to have eye contact with the audience.

Revisit your ideas if required.

Use simple language to convey your message effectively and efficiently.

ALSA PAPER PRESENTATION COMPETITION 2022 RUNNER UP

Rojina Parchizadeh

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

Before the commencing of the oral presentation rounds, I spent a substantial time practising my presentation in front of classmates and friends. I asked them for feedback and adjusted my speech accordingly. Feedback is your best friend in a paper presentation.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

This is something I struggled with. In the weeks leading up to the due date, I was actually prioritising the paper presenta-tion over many of my other commitments, especially 2% quizzes. However, I did try to maintain exercise in my routine, as I find it helps to keep me sane and productive.

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

The judges’ thought provoking questions are likely to catch you off guard. The judges in the paper presentation competition are often well rounded researchers and sometimes members of the judiciary. For example, in the last competition I participated in, the judges included the Honourable Justice Edelman, the Honourable Justice Derrington and Professor Kit Barker. I was asked questions that I had not encountered in my research, and questions about other areas of law which could be related to my topic. You have to develop the skill of thinking on your feet and having basic knowledge of other tangentially related areas of law.

4. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

The Paper Presentation competition provided me with the opportunity to examine an area of law that I was passionate about. There are no boundaries for your topic, it is completely your choice.

WRITTEN SUBMISSION

1. The difficulty of the subject matter.

2. Presentation of clear and structured ideas.

3. Critical evaluation of primary and secondary sources.

4. Independent, original and insightful treatment of the topic supported by evidence.

5. Adherence to AGLC4 referencing style and correct punctuation and grammar.

ORAL PRESENTATION

1. Clear, confident and logically organised flow of argument.

2. Effective use of visual aids, pace, and tone.

3. Engagement with the audience.

4. Clear mastery of the subject matter with a detailed understanding of the issue and its legal aspects.

5. Direct and focused response to questions.

The two-part structure of the competition, which consists of a written component and an oral component, presents different challenges. While writing the submission, I practised my research and critical analysis skills. However, the oral component requires distilling a large issue which people dedicate years to understanding into a couple of minutes. Creating an engaging presentation for a layman is a pivotal skill which is often neglected in academic studies.

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate(s) were operating efficiently?

As someone who has always struggled with time-management, what I suggest is being efficient from the beginning of the research process. You will read many papers (in my case, 40) and remember about 10% of each paper. Something which helped me was creating folders for papers I read based on the topic that they explored, and noting which papers were more relevant and had the best points in a separate document.

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a first-time competitor?

For paper presentation, you have to know the weaknesses of your arguments and have a reasonable solution to overcoming those weaknesses. In fact, by addressing your weaknesses before being asked about them, your argument becomes more convincing. It is important to not give the appearance of being partisan, rather, having come to a conclusion based upon the evidence before you. The best way to achieve this is to ask yourself critical questions throughout the research process and think about what the other side may say, as one of the judges may ask you the same question!

“Ask yourself critical questions throughout the research process and think about what the other side may say, as one of the judges may ask you the same question!”

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR)

OVERALL COMMITMENT: MODERATE COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Includes but not is limited to researching, role playing, practising oral submissions

Pre-requisites:

• Open to all LLB/JD students

• Previous experience in negotiation or client interview is favourable

• Teams shall consist of two members

This competition is a culmination of a variety of professional skills into a singular competition. Showcasing important skills developed from client interviews, negotiations, and letters of advice, this competition seeks to replicate the ADR process which is critical to the legal practice. Furthermore, it allows teams consisting of two members to enhance their advocacy skills, teamwork and become more well-rounded as practitioners.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

The competition is divided into four primary sections:

1. Client Interview (25 minutes)

Teams will engage in 20-minute client interviews where competitors are expected to extract relevant information, outline the issues and provide a preliminary assessment and resolution. This is followed by a 5-minute post-consultation in which teams are expected to provide self-analysis on the interview and answer any questions posed by the judge.

3.. Letter of Advice (60 minutes)

Teams will have 60 minutes to draft a letter of advice that outlines a summary of the interview and presents options available to the client. This letter offers a preliminary application of the law and should observe legal formalities and etiquette.

HOW TO PREPARE

2. Negotiation (60 minutes)

Teams will enter a 50-minute negotiation with an opposing counsel that is privy to the same matter. During this time teams will attempt to reach an agreement that best aligns with their client’s interests. Each team will then have a reflective period of 10 minutes with the judge to discuss the outcome and performance in the negotiation.

4. Presentation (15 minutes)

Participants are required to present a 10 minute summary of the client case, the ADR conducted by the teams, and the prospect of future litigation. This presentation can be supported by visual aids such as a PowerPoint presentation. Judges are allowed 5 minutes of questions to finish the presentation period.

As this competition has many elements, preparation will vary according to which section of the ADR teams are entering. Therefore, it is critical that the client’s interest is prioritized and advocated for through each section.

PIdentify the client’s interest

Under the difference between the client’s interests, wants, and needs. Distinguishing this early on can help the progression of the interview and assist with retrieving critical information about the issue on hand. Furthermore, this can avoid time-wasting and prevent irrelevant discussions from occurring.

PHave a negotiation strategy

Understanding your opposing counsel’s position and interest is important to a positive outcome in a negotiation. Leveraging this information with your client’s interest in mind can offer avenues for creative and collaborative resolutions.

PTime Management

Rounds with extended time such as letters of advice can be deceivingly short and run participants into the risk of unfinished work. Therefore, it is important to manage time and expectations by prioritizing and dividing tasks between team members.

PKnow your matter, know your client!

During the presentation portion of the compet-tion, the team should present their findings succinctly and in chronological order. This will help judges to follow along easily and help prevent confusion and errors by participants. Teams should also be open to reflecting upon their performance throughout the progression of the entire competition. This will assist teams to correct small errors or misinformation and help solidify their client’s interest in their future actions.

JUDGING CRITERIA CLIENT INTERVIEW

a. Assessment of the problem and ability ADR options

b. Teamwork between members and overall outcome

c. Self-analysis of strengths and weaknesses

NEGOTIATION

a. Negotiation strategy and flexibility to new information

b. The creativity of options generated

c. Teamwork and collaboration

TIPS AND TRICKS

01. 03. 02.

LETTER OF ADVICE

a. Preliminary application of the law

b. Exploration of ADR options

c. Application of plain English PRESENTATION

a. Accurately summarises the client’s situation and ADR process

b. Comprehensively outlines the potential outcomes

Have distinct roles within your team to prevent fatigue during the competition.

Have a timer during the each round to stay on track.

Have a strategy for each section of the competition.

2021 ADR COMPETITOR

Simone Alexander

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition?

Preparation and time management are key to tackling a competition like ADR. Prior to the beginning of the competition, my partner and I allocated sufficient time to discuss each element of the competition. For each section, we agreed on a general structure and allocated roles for which we would be responsible. For example, Sarah, my partner, would be in charge of icebreakers and setting the tone for the meeting whilst I provide a more administrative approach, ensuring that key points like agendas and summary of facts were available on hand.

2. How did you allocate your time during this process?

While all elements of this competition are important it is under-standable that some sections will need more preparation than others. Generally, negotiations and letters of advice will be the most intensive as external considerations of law are introduced.

planning to prevent workloads from accumulating and deescalating unnecessary stress.

4. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

Each section of the competition is uniquely interconnected. Therefore the approaches or strategies implemented in the early stages of the competition can significantly impact what avenues and approaches you can use later on. Therefore it is important to be mindful of flow on effect as it can quickly become restrictive if you fail to adapt correctly to the situation.

“This competition is a marathon, not a sprint. You need to pace yourself throughout the day and consider the consequences of your choices or actions on the subsequent portions of the competition.”

3. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

Staying ahead by using a calendar or planner to note important assessments and extracurricular activities is a great way to stay organised. I also make sure to allow extra flexibility in the weeks leading up to the competition to accommodate research and

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate(s) were operating efficiently?

It is incredibly important that both teammates set aside time to read the question and provide materials in detail. In a competition that is so time sensitive, this eliminates wasting unnecessary time. Furthermore, before the beginning of each round, spending two to three minutes briefing each other on concerns or potential issues is also highly valuable to operating efficiently.

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a first-time competitor? This competition is a marathon not a sprint. You need to pace yourself throughout the day and consider the consequences of your choices or actions on the subsequent portions of the competition.

2021 ADR COMPETITOR Emily Lizzo

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition?

ADR is structured differently from other law competitions, because the four competition rounds occur within a single day. Therefore, the first step for any new competitor should be to familiarise yourself with the ADR competition rules — particularly the deadlines, judging criteria and the time allocated for each section.

Second, preparing a strategy before the competition is a great way to reduce time- wasting activities during the rounds. This strategy discussion should include:

• A discussion of what role you will adopt in the client interview/negotiation eg. note taker

• Non-verbal cues

• A draft negotiation agenda

• The creation of templates (eg. a letter of advice template, a powerpoint presentation slide deck) and;

• Plan who will bring relevant resources (eg binders).

Third, watching videos of past skill-specific competitions are a great way to familiarise yourself with what each round requires. You can find videos on the MULS socials, YouTube, Podcasts, and also helpful skill-specific books which can guide you. Fourth, aim to improve your general legal knowledge.

2. How did you manage your other commitments with your competition schedule?

Incorporating a calendar into your study schedule is the best way to consistently manage competing deadlines. Scheduling time each week to prepare for each individual section of the competition will help you stay on top of work and competitions. Then, stay accountable by scheduling regular check-in meetings with your teammate in the weeks leading up to the competition. If you are time-poor, divide the pre-competition prep amongst your team, and use the check-ins to summarise your research/relevant info.

3. What was the most difficult or unexpected aspect of the competition?

The ADR competition is a test of skill and mental stamina. I found the most challenging part of the ADR competition to be the quick transition between rounds. This transition requires teams to adapt your presentation style to suit the factual scenario. Each round is scored separately, so maintaining high performance standards is essential.

4. How has this competition aided in your personal or professional development?

The ADR Championship is unique, because it tests four different written and oral skillsets. This competition has enabled me to identify both my passions, and the weak areas in my professional skillset (kind of like a mid session quiz). In effect, the competition has helped me develop both public speaking/oral advocacy skills, presentation skills, and formal writing skills which are essential in the legal sphere.

5. How did you ensure that you and your teammate(s) were operating efficiently?

My teammate and I aimed to set expectations for the competition early. Communication is essential in the ADR Championship. Prior to the competition, my teammate and I met to read through the rules, plan out our preparation strategies, to discuss our communication styles, and to determine the best method of unpacking hypothetical scenarios.

6. What is one tip you wish you knew as a first-time competitor?

I wish I had competed earlier. It’s very common for the same people to enter multiple skills competitions, and diving into legal advocacy enables you to meet these like-minded people — you can learn something from everyone! I found it incredibly rewarding to compete with a friend, however, signing up to the competition as an individual is a great way to meet new people.

“Diving into legal advocacy enables you to meet these like-minded people — you can learn something from everyone!”

2020 ADR Competition Champions

INTERVARSITY COMPETITIONS

WHAT IS INTERVARSITY?

Intervarsity Competitions replicate competitions that provide internally at a larger scale. The Competitions are designed to challenge individuals with previous Competitions experience. It also provides students with a great opportunity to travel, meet other law students and flex their legal skills as a representative of MULS.

OVERVIEW

Intervarsity Competitions provide Macquarie Law students the opportunity to develop their legal skills by competing with students from other universities within Australia. These competitions are designed to give experienced competitors the chance to represent Macquarie against other universities in an opportunity that exposes them to the new ideas and perspectives practiced by other universities, professional judges working in the legal industry, and the ability to broaden their legal skills and proficiencies.

STRUCTURE

Bilateral Intervarsity Competitions

A bilateral intervarsity competition is held between a small number of teams from two different universities. These competitions generally consist of a single grand final round, prior to which ample time of preparation is given for teams to perform their best. Such competitions include: the Margaret Cunneen Witness Examination Competition; the MULS v SULS Client Interview Competition; and the Sir John Peden Contract Law Moot.

Intervarsity Tournaments

An intervarsity tournament is a competition held between multiple teams from a number of different universities. They generally follow the same format as internal competitions, with preliminary rounds followed by a number of final rounds; concluding at a grand final. Such competitions include: the Baker McKenzie Women’s Moot; the UTS LSS Intervarsity Negotiation Competition; the Hon Michael Kirby Contract Law Moot; and the UTS LSS Intervarsity Legal Technology Moot.

HOW TO PREPARE

• Intervarsity competitions include a large array of professional legal competitions, thereby specific preparation procedures will ultimately be dependent on the type of competition for which you are registering for.

• The MULS website at muls.org contains a number of recorded grand finals which are excellent material in order to acquaint oneself with the process of any given competition format.

2022 SULS vs MULS ADR Competition

MULS ENVIRONMENTAL LAW MOOT

OVERALL COMMITMENT: HIGH COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Commitment must be highly consistent as there must be time allocated to extensive legal research (case law, legislation etc), practising and finalising oral and written submissions.

Pre-requisites:

• MULS can only nominate two teams to compete against other Universities; students with previous mooting experience will be prioritised.

Macquarie University has a strong history of involvement in environmental law. Established in 1983, the Centre for Environmental Law (CEL) builds on the research strength and expertise of its academic staff in the area of biodiversity law and governance.

The flagship MULS Environmental Law Mooting Competition will invite law students across NSW to moot on a problem of environmental law, a field that is particularly pertinent and rapidly developing at the moment. The question can focus on any of the following topics; trade and environment, water law and governance, pollution and environmental regulation, Indigenous peoples, customary law and natural resource management, or climate change.

MULS ENVIRONMENTAL LAW MOOT WINNER

Sami Shamsi

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

The initial rounds of this competition, like many moots, was rather research-intensive, and hence required substantial time management to maintain a balance alongside other commitments. I found regular meetings with the broader team and striving to complete parts of the research a good way to balance it all!

2. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

This competition definitely helped hone my skills in legal problem solving, as it does require competitors to navigate a complex area of law and flip arguments in favour of both Appellant and Respondent.

3. For competitors considering this competition in the future, what other competitions can they attempt to boost their skills/what advice can you provide?

Attempting any other mooting competition would be beneficial to anyone considering this competition in the future, as the core skills are transferable regardless of what subject area the moot is based upon. However, I would recommend being involved in any intervarsity competitions provided by MULS, as these are always a great opportunity to test your skills and approach

WHO IS IT SUITABLE FOR?

Everyone is encouraged to apply to compete for Macquarie University in the MULS Environmental Law Competition. However, as MULS can only nominate two teams to compete against other Universities, students with previous mooting experience will be prioritised. As this is an intervarsity moot, the level of competition between teams is quite high and thus, previous experience would be beneficial.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

The competition will consist of three preliminary rounds, followed by a quarter-finals, semifinals and ultimately culminating in a grand final round.

to mooting against other highly skilled competitors from other universities. I would also recommend competing in some internal MULS moots, whether it’s the Criminal or Contract Law Moots, as a good way to build the foundational skills before progressing to more complex competitions engaging in more difficult areas of law.

4. What is a unique quality of this competition that differentiates it from the internal competitions that are offered?

I found the topic area of this competition to be highly unique and different from any other competition I have done, given the field of environmental law is not typically focused upon in mooting competitions, and was a great way to engage with new concepts.

5. What is something you wish you knew or had done prior to the commencement of the competition?

I wish I knew the importance of being able to adapt one’s style of mooting and presentation of arguments, as it may be important to vary these depending on each round.

6. Would you recommend this competition to your fellow law students? If so, why?

I would recommend this competition to other law students as it tests one’s knowledge in an interesting intersection of environmental and constitutional law, and is a good challenge for competitors.

MICHAEL KIRBY CONTRACT LAW MOOT

OVERALL COMMITMENT: HIGH COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Commitment must be highly consistent as there must be time allocated to extensive legal research (case law, legislation etc), practising and finalising oral and written submissions.

Pre-requisites:

• MULS can only nominate two teams to compete against other Universities; students with previous mooting experience will be prioritised.

The Annual Michael Kirby Contract Law Moot Competition is hosted by Victoria Law School in the College of Law and Justice at Victoria University (VU). The competition lasts over four days and teams of up to four members are required to travel to Victoria Law School in Melbourne to compete in-person. As one of the largest moot court competitions in Australia, the Kirby moot is open to teams from all across Australia. Macquarie University is allowed to send two teams to compete.

MICHAEL KIRBY CONTRACT LAW MOOT WINNER 2022

Farrah Mikhail

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

Our preparation for this moot was similar to the general preparation required by all moots, but over a longer period of time with a heavier workload. There were three rough stages: the first was researching, the second was drafting and finalising the written submissions, and the third was practising our oral submissions. We spent most of our time working on our written submissions, which helped us become comfortable with the arguments for the orals.

2. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

The Kirby Moot is an exciting way to develop communication skills that are helpful in putting forward a strong point of view. This is true for both the written submissions, the oral submissions, and, not to be overlooked, determinative discussions with teammates

about how we will approach a problem. Grappling with a long and layered question also challenged and advanced my legal understanding of Contract Law. It was also insightful to experience how an arbitration might run as opposed to a trial, as I find ADR to be an interesting and ever-growing field.

3. For competitors considering this competition in the future, what other competitions can they attempt to boost their skills/what advice can you provide?

It’s a good idea to start with at least one but ideally a couple of internal competitions to become familiar with the mooting format and to develop your research, writing and oral skills. For example, Foundations or Novice Moot, Contract Law Moot and Criminal Law Moot are good places to start. If you already have some experience, the next step up would be intervarsity moots where you compete against other universities, such as Sir John Peden Contract Law Moot or MULS’ own Multilateral Environmental Law Moot.

2022 Winners of the Michael Kirby Contract Law Moot

4. What is a unique quality of this competition that differentiates it from the internal competitions that are offered?

Going to Melbourne and having the opportunity to meet and connect with other mooting students from all over Australia for the week made it a very fun and interesting experience. Presenting in front of a range of distinguished judges was also very insightful and we learnt a lot from their advice. But best of all was going out to dinner every night in Australia’s culinary capital!

5. What is something you wish you knew or had done prior to the commencement of the competition?

I wish we had more familiarity and certainty with this moot’s particular format and procedures. For example, we only realised a couple of days into the competition how the oral submissions (other than in the first rounds) do not have to be based on the writtens at all as they are marked separately. Therefore, there is a

lot of room to improve your arguments as you receive feedback. I also think I could have benefited from leaving more time during our preparation for practising our orals.

6. Would you recommend this competition to your fellow law students? If so, why?

I would definitely recommend this competition to avid mooters and arbitration enthusiasts. It is a great opportunity to develop your skills in researching, forming legal arguments, working in a team, and oral presentations. And it is definitely the most enjoyable and challenging moot I have taken part in. As this moot is an Arbitration moot, the formalities and the way it is set out is different from normal, which is good exposure for those interested in arbitration.

SIR JOHN PEDEN CONTRACT LAW MOOT

OVERALL COMMITMENT:

HIGH COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Commitment must be highly consistent as there must be time allocated to extensive legal research (case law, legislation etc), practising and finalising oral and written submissions.

Pre-requisites:

• Students in their second year who have completed Contract Law

• Mooting experience is essential

• Team shall consist of three members, where there are two counsels and an instructing solicitor

The Sir John Peden Contract Law moot is held between Sydney University and Macquarie University and concerns a question of Contract Law. It is a single round intensive competition usually taking place at Sydney University. This moot has attracted a high calibre of legal professionals to judge the competition, including The Honourable Chief Justice French of the High Court of Australia.

Sir John Peden Contract Law Moot

SIR JOHN PEDEN CONTRACT LAW MOOT CHAMPION 2022

Imogen Bryant

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

Like any moot, we spent a lot of the time on research — pulling out our old contract law textbooks, and trawling through Halsbury’s Laws of Australia. Our team also organised some practice sessions with a coach, where we could rehearse our oral arguments and receive feedback from someone outside of our team.

2. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

This moot is a good opportunity to refresh your knowledge of contract law principles! Additionally, the facts we were given were quite short, which meant we had to work out how to use the limited information before us to argue a complex legal case. It was important to use the facts we had to workshop a straightforward outline of our argument, ensuring that we could put forward a case that was comprehensible and convincing, despite not being able to rely on a meticulous set of facts.

3. For competitors considering this competition in the future, what other competitions can they attempt to boost their skills/what advice can you provide?

Participating in any intervarsity moot is a good experience — it’s a great insight into how other universities approach mooting, and you can pick up some tips and tricks from other mooters that you can take with you into future competitions.

4. What is a unique quality of this competition that differentiates it from the internal competitions that are offered?

The Peden Moot is a one-round intervarsity competition. Unlike other internal moots with general and final rounds, which allow the teams to rehearse and refine their arguments, the Peden moot gives just one opportunity to put your best case forward before an esteemed bench.

5. What is something you wish you knew or had done prior to the commencement of the competition?

Read the question over and over again, and memorise the facts as best you can. In competitions like this, with an esteemed bench and highly trained competitors, the results often come down to how well you can make your case based on the given facts. Many people will have read their textbooks front to back to prepare, so applying those principles and making a distinctive case on the facts that are clear and convincing is essential.

6. Would you recommend this competition to your fellow law students? If so, why?

I would recommend it! Whilst the research and preparation process isn’t as quick as the competition itself, it’s still a fun way to test your mooting skills against other well-trained mooters, and a brilliant opportunity to receive some advocacy feedback from an esteemed bench.

“Read the question over and over again, and memorise the facts as best as you can.”

Sir John Peden Contract Law Moot Winners 2021

PHILIP C.JESSUP INTERNATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

OVERALL

COMMITMENT: HIGH COMMITMENT

Preparation time: Commitment must be highly consistent as there must be time allocated to extensive legal research (case law, legislation etc), practising and finalising oral and written submissions.

Pre-requisites:

• Mooting experience is beneficial, there is a large amount of time set aside for preparations and research to compete in Jessup

• Note: Individuals must be successful in the application process before being eligible to compete.

The Philip C.Jessup International Moot Court Competition (Jessup) is the world’s oldest and largest international mooting competition, now running for 70 years with over 700 law schools from all over the world regularly competing. The competition involves teams of up to five law students producing written and oral submissions on a detailed problem involving issues of international law.

The Australian qualifying rounds are normally held in Canberra in February with the Australian final normally conducted in the High Court of Australia.

WHO IS IT SUITABLE FOR?

As always, anyone and everyone is encouraged to apply but previous experience in meeting would be highly beneficial. This is a high-level competition with hundreds of teams competing and is not suitable for first-time competitors. Applicants are encouraged to ensure they have the large amount of time needed to set aside for preparations and research needed to compete in Jessup.

2021 Philip C. Jessup International Moot Competition

PHILIP C.JESSUP INTERNATIONAL LAW MOOT WINNER 2021

Jacqui

Stark

1. What preparation did you undertake prior to the commencement of the competition? How did you allocate your time during this process?

Being a member of the Jessup team is a significant time commitment. Our question was released in mid-September and we started research straight away. After the semester ended in November, the team spent almost every spare hour at uni developing arguments and writing our memorials which were due in early January. Once these were submitted, we spent about a month practising mooting in preparation for the national rounds which were held in February.

2. How has this competition aided in your professional or personal development?

Taking part in Jessup has helped significantly with my research, writing and oral presentation skills, which has made the rest of my degree feel a lot easier. It also helped me develop a whole range of soft skills, like teamwork and communication. This is one of the most rewarding parts of Jessup, seeing how quickly every member of the team learns and grows over the course of the competition, challenging themselves and building a wide range of skills in a short period of time.

3. For competitors considering this competition in the future, what other competitions can they attempt to boost their skills/what advice can you provide?

While you don’t need to be the best or most experienced mooter to be selected for Jessup, taking part in some internal moots is a great way to get some familiarity with the process and develop your skills and confidence in preparation. If you’re interested in international law in particular, the IHL moot will give you a bit of exposure into how it operates.

4. What is a unique quality of this competition that differentiates it from the internal competitions that are offered?

Jessup is one of the largest and most prestigious international moots that operates on a scale much bigger than internal competitions and most other intervarsity ones. This is reflected in the length of the question, the scope of the arguments and research (nearly 10,000 words of arguments go into both the applicant and respondent memorials), and the number of teams who take part every year. The Jessup question each year focuses on contemporary and emerging international legal issues that don’t have straightforward answers, so it requires a lot more creative reasoning than other competitions. You also get great coaching to support you throughout the process, exposure to a diverse range of judges, and you get to meet teams from all across Australia.

5. What is something you wish you knew or had done prior to the commencement of the competition?

I wish I had known just how much time gets dedicated to preparation from the minute the question gets released. It’s something that is emphasised in the application process, but I didn’t truly appreciate this until I was in the middle of long days at uni over the summer break. That being said, there was a lot of support from the rest of the team, the incredible coaches and former Jessupers, which helped a lot.

6. Would you recommend this competition to your fellow law students? If so, why?

If you are willing to make the commitment, I would absolutely recommend Jessup to anyone interested in mooting and/or public international law. Although it was a challenge, being a part of the Jessup team has been an absolute highlight of my degree and the last few years, and I think this feeling is echoed by the rest of the team. It taught me so much in a short period of time, and has helped me a lot in what I have done since.

“One of the most rewarding parts of Jessup is seeing how quickly every member of the team learns and grows over the course of the competition.”

“...challenge yourself and build a wide range of skills in a short period of time.”

Australian Champions of Philip C. Jessup International Moot Court Competition 2023

MARGARET CUNNEEN SC WITNESS EXAMINATION

OVERALL COMMITMENT: MODERATE COMMITMENT

Preparation time:

This time includes research into the key rules of evidence and its relevant sections, practicing and identifying the holes in your arguments (possible objections), preparing the witness

Pre-requisites:

• No team, each competitor must prepare for and complete individually

• Competitor has had success in the Witness Examination process before being eligible to compete.

2022 WINNER OF MARGARET SC CUNNEEN WITNESS EXAMINATION

Brendan Piech

1. How did your experience in other competitions shape your success in the Margaret Cunneen Witness Examination?

In general, intervarsity competitions offer students an elevated competing experience concerning the calibre of competitors, judges, and question scenarios. As such, there remains a higher threshold of necessary past competition experience one must bring forward to competitions such as the Margaret Cunneen Witness Examination beyond that of most internal MULS competitions.

My competition experience before this competition consisted of numerous internal advocacy and professional skills competitions, as well as several intervarsity and national-level competitions. Continued involvement in competitions develops transferable competition-related skills, including courtroom etiquette, the ability to express oneself clearly and convincingly, and self-regulate stress that may arise in high-calibre competitions.

The strong baseline of second-nature competitionrelated skills was essential in allowing for increased mindfulness during the weeks leading up to the competition and the several hours of permitted preparation with the scenario. Remaining clearminded and analytical is necessary to become familiarised with the nuances of the problem question, two witnesses, and ancillary considerations, as was required after being presented with a problematic prosecution case.

2. What is a unique quality of this competition that differentiates it from the internal competitions that are offered?

A unique quality of the UTS LSS x MULS Margaret Cunneen Witness Examination is that the competition represents a long-standing relationship between MULS and UTS LSS.

Since the competition’s inception in 2013, a representative from UTS LSS and MULS have displayed their trial advocacy skills before Margaret Cunneen and an esteemed panel of judges. As with many intervarsity competitions, a certain level of prestige is attached to the opportunity to compete in these established friendly rivalries between fellow law student societies whilst representing MULS and the Law School.

3. What did the preparation process consist of and how did you manage this workload with your other commitments?

My preparation for the UTS LSS x MULS Margaret Cunneen Witness Examination competition was threefold:

First, reviewing recorded witness examination competitions, including the Australian Law Student Society Witness Examination and Margaret Cunneen Witness Examination competition recorded finals. Observing high-calibre competitors undertaking the same competition is invaluable in learning from the different styles of witness examination and the commentary and feedback provided.

“My advice for those considering any intervarsity competition is to be bold about putting yourself forward.”

2016 Margaret Cunneen SC Witness Examination

Second, it is essential to have a solid understanding of the evidentiary rules of law, particularly the admissibility of evidence, objectionable questions and evidence, alongside several exceptions to said rules. Several sources of information were available to strengthen this aspect of my preparation. Namely, the NSW Judicial Commission’s Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book , the Evidence Act , and witness examination guides such as Cavell on Witness Examination and Irving Younger’s Ten Commandments of Cross-Examination.

Last, I was fortunate to obtain several court transcripts to familiarise myself further with witness examination in practice.

Balance with other commitments

Like all law school competitions, the scheduling falls within the academic calendar and amidst numerous study commitments and other extracurricular respon-sibilities. Further, considering working responsibilities, it can be challenging to find the time to sufficiently prepare for any competition, as was the case with the Margaret Cunneen Witness Examination. However, making the necessary sacrifices becomes easier when you are passionate about competing in competitions and the professional

skills required to compete successfully. The balance requires a willingness to make sacrifices, such as trading a month’s worth of Netflix for watching previously recorded witness examination competitions.

4. For competitors considering this competition in the future, what other competitions can they attempt to boost their skills and what advice can you provide?

For students considering this competition in the future, I recommend thoroughly exploring the MULS internal advocacy competition opportunities available. That is, familiarising yourself with some of the many moot competitions on offer by MULS, alongside, and most importantly, the MULS Witness Examination Competition. As the saying goes, do not be afraid to go out on a branch, for that is where the fruit is found.

My advice for those considering any intervarsity competition is to be bold about putting yourself forward. Whilst the UTS LSS x MULS Margaret Cunneen Witness Examination competition was one of my most humbling competitions experiences, the experience and confidence gained proved invaluable in my future witness examination competition endeavours.

MULS X SULS ADR

Modelled after the MULS ADR Championship, this competition will be hosted in-person at Macquarie University and shall feature two rounds consisting of a client interview followed by a negotiation based on the same scenario. The scenario will likely pose several issues which teams will have to navigate in a short space of time whilst also maintaining client rapport. Due to the structure of this competition, MULS will be nominating two teams of two students for this competition.

2020 COMPETITOR

Simone Alexander

1. What is the unique quality of this competition that differentiates it from the internal competitions that are offered?

Whilst similar to internal competitions offered by MULS, the level of difficulty in terms of issues and competitors is significantly higher. Competitors at this level are expected to have previously engaged with similar competitions. Therefore it’s important to use all your previous experiences and resources when engaging in this competition.

2. What did the preparation process consist of and how did you manage this workload with your other commitments?

Prior to the competition my teammate and I engaged in Zoom meetings with a coach to practice and prepare different strategies that we could implement. We ensure to set aside a time on different days leading up to the competition to address each

element of the competition. This prevented fatigue and ensured that each time we engaged with the competition we had new perspectives and ideas.

3. For competitors considering this competition in the future, what other competitions can they attempt to boost their skills/what advice can you provide?

It is a must to compete in the Client Interview, Negotiation, and internal ADR Championship before entering this competition. Each section has its own unique set of challenges and therefore it's imperative that you understand how to tackle each section individually before diving into this competition. I found that my experiences in internal professional skills greatly impacted how quickly I was able to assess the issue at hand, provide solutions and engage with the opposing counsel. Competing in these negotiations or client interviews will help provide a holistic understanding of the ADR process and strengthen your ability to move forward in the competition.

“do not be afraid to go out on a branch, for that is where the fruit is found.”

ADC-ICC ASIA PACIFIC COMMERCIAL MEDIATION COMPETITION

The Annual ADC-ICC Asia-Pacific Commercial Mediation Competition creates a unique opportunity for university students to practice their negotiation skills in a commercial mediation setting; an essential area of dispute resolution in international commercial law. Competing teams represent two sides of an international commercial dispute, with members assuming the roles of the Client and Counsel.

2021 COMPETITOR

Annya Reshty

1. What is the unique quality of this competition that differentiates it from the internal competitions that are offered?

The unique qualities of this competition are firstly that it is a mediation competition which has a slightly different structure to a negotiation competition in that it requires more formalities between the parties and involves a third-party mediator. Secondly, you have the opportunity to compete against institutions across the Asia-Pacific who have diverse negotiating skills. You are also able to attend various networking events and meet legal professionals from different countries and backgrounds.

2. What did the preparation process consist of and how did you manage this workload with your other commitments?

In terms of preparation, my team and I had consistent meetings over Zoom as we were required to make submissions for the three preliminary questions before the commencement of the competition. We also had a coach which we scheduled meetings with to discuss our plan and strategies for each question.

These extensive meetings and preparation meant that we had to balance our university workload and personal commitments by allocating specific time in our week to prepare for the competition. We would always have open discussions about the amount of time we would be able to dedicate each week so that no member of the team felt overwhelmed. To make the workload lighter we allocated certain parts of the work to a specific person so that we could all collaborate at the next meeting.

A qualified professional mediates the dispute and distinguished judges assess how well the teams have advanced their interests. This is the world’s largest moot exclusively devoted to international commercial mediation. For more information, please visit: https:// disputescentre.com.au/apcmc/

3. For competitors considering this competition in the future, what other competitions can they attempt to boost their skills/what advice can you provide?

I highly recommend competing in all the professional skills competitions. The Negotiations and Client Interview competitions that MULS offers equips you with the ability to identify and critically analyse legal issues and how to actively listen and communicate constructively. Competing in the ADR Competition will also provide you with a holistic understanding of all the professional skills required in the legal profession.

I found that having a background in these competitions made it easier for me to break down the scenarios we were given in ADCICC and I had a strong starting point whenever I was unsure about how to approach a question. I highly recommend competing as much as you can because it provides you with the insight into the practical skills required of a legal professional which you would not experience otherwise in your law degree.

“We would always have open discussions about the amount of time we would be able to dedicate each week so that no member of the team felt overwhelmed.”

FROM THE BENCH

Our judges' feedback is one of the most valuable tools in competitions. Hear from a variety of judges, their experiences and how you can become the best competitor.

Marco Lopresti

Macquarie Alumni, Witness Examination Judge

What is the difference between a good competitor and a great competitor?

A great competitor will anticipate questions from judges and submissions from opposing counsel and be prepared to respond confidently, clearly and concisely with supporting authorities. In witness examination, a great competitor will drill down into a handful of key issues rather than covering everything in the witness statements.

What is the most common mistake students make when competing?

Lack of eye contact / looking down at notes and reading from a pre-prepared script.

Dr. Lise Barry

Dean of Macquarie Law School

What is the difference between a good competitor and a great competitor?

Preparation and creativity separate the good from the great.

The best competitors prepare for every eventuality. They understand the law, but more than that, they are able to put themselves in the shoes of the client and think creatively and realistically about how to argue a position or make compromises and concessions. Really great competitors seek feedback and then act on that feedback. This takes humility and the ability to accept and listen to criticism.

What is the most common mistake students make when competing?

The most common mistake in the Skills Competitions is a lack of time management. You need to keep a good eye on the clock and understand what to prioritise in your client interview or negotiation. In the Negotiation Competition, the most common mistake is a lack of reality testing both the team’s own solutions or the proposals of the opposition.

How has your competition experience shaped your professional life?

I practice in public liability litigation so my experience in mooting and witness examination made real-world court appearances a lot easier. Competitions also required me to work under time constraints and identify the strengths and weaknesses in opposing case theories, all of which have proved invaluable in my professional life.

Can you recount the most memorable performance in a competition that you have judged?

Competitor performance in witness examination finals is typically very entertaining to watch and judge. The competitors have refined their advocacy skills over the course of the competition, they know the rules and are more comfortable than in opening rounds.

MULS offers a variety of different competitions — what is one competition students should compete in this year? Witness Examination.

What is your favourite depiction of the legal profession in a TV series or movie and why?

The Devil’s Advocate, because Al Pacino.

Can you recount the most memorable performance in a competition that you have judged?

Macquarie Law School has produced two Australian Championship teams in Client Interview — Nicola Amys and Stephanie Fehan were exceptionally good at time management and sharing roles — they knew each other so well and had very complimentary styles. Reece Corbett-Wilkins and Nicholas Ferrari were national champions in Client Interview (and runners up in World Champs) and subsequently national champions in the Negotiation Competition as well. They had a lot of commercial understanding and common sense which they applied to both competitions. Both of these teams were unflappable and always polite — never aggressive.

MULS offers a variety of different competitions — what is one competition students should compete in this year?

I recommend the skills competitions because client interview and negotiation skills comps teach you how to listen, how to think on your feet and how to work in a team. These are skills that everyone needs, no matter what profession or role they are aiming for.

What is your favourite depiction of the legal profession in a TV series or movie and why?

I have a soft spot for Saul Goodman from Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul — underneath his highly unethical practice lies a heart of gold and a great sense of humour.

Dr. Amanda Head

What is the difference between a good competitor and a great competitor?

Good competitors come into the competition very well prepared. Great competitors are, of course, also very well prepared but are also able to adapt and respond accordingly in the present moment.

What is the most common mistake students make when competing?

This relates to the previous question. Students will often be very well prepared but sometimes competitors are thrown a curve ball during a competition. A common mistake is not adapting and just continuing with the ‘script’. The best competitors are the ones who are in the moment.

Can you recount the most memorable performance in a competition that you have judged?

I would have to say it was when I was judging a client interview

Dr. Andrew Burke

Senior Lecturer and Professional Skills Judge Senior Lecturer

What is the difference between a good competitor and a great competitor?

Practice! No-one is born with amazing legal skills. We all develop them over time. The more you do, the better you will get. Learn from your mistakes – you can learn more from failing then succeeding — be humble, accept advice and keep going. With practice the good becomes great.

What is the most common mistake students make when competing?

Probably rushing. Competitions have time limits but many students don’t use all their time. It’s like walking out of an exam half an hour early. It’s not TV — it’s not two sentences, mic drop, sit down — it’s ok to pause to think before you yield the floor. What matters is that you’ve said everything you need to say or asked every question you need to ask. Also, if you talk slowly it’s easier to think on your feet.

How has your competition experience shaped your professional life?

Ha! The Macquarie Law School that I attended as an undergrad did not have a lot of competitions. There were some but it was

competition between MQU and USYD. The two students representing MQU were two of my former students from Law Lawyers and Society. I was so incredibly proud of their performance and application of the skills they learnt in my unit. They really give the USYD students a run for their money.

MULS offers a variety of different competitions–what is one competition students should compete in this year?

I am a little biased in this respect. I teach communication skills and client interviewing in Law, Lawyers and Society, and so I would recommend the client interview competition. It requires students to think on their feet, work collaboratively in a team, and develop skills that are transferable well beyond a career in the legal profession.

What is your favourite depiction of the legal profession in a TV series or movie and why?

Good question. There are so many movies that focus on the legal profession, and many do not portray the profession particularly well. One of my favourites is the screen adaptation of John Grisham’s novel, The Client and in particular, Susan Sarandon’s character, Reggie Love. Reggie is an attorney representing a child who witnessed a murder. Her initial interactions with her client and then with Tommy Lee Jones’ character are just priceless. Susan Sarandon was nominated for an Academy Award and won a BAFTA for the role. I thoroughly recommend it.

nothing like today. I did not have those opportunities and so I learned advocacy on the job. I’m jealous of the opportunities now offered and it blows me away how advanced some students’ skills are by graduation.

Can you recount the most memorable performance in a competition that you have judged?

There have been a couple of memorable disasters but I’m not going to embarrass anyone, and in fact I admire and respect those students for having a go even when they were clearly terrified beginners. There have been quite a few very good competitors in the past few years; probably Fareed Qureshi stands out, and he has gone on to work for the Law School as a coach for the Jessup International Law Moot team.

MULS offers a variety of different competitions — what is one competition students should compete in this year?

Well it all depends! If you’re a beginning then the Foundations or Novice Moot. If you’ve done those, then move on into the other MULS comps. If you’ve done a few of them then look to rep Macquarie in a bigger comp. Of course I’m biased, but the Criminal Law Moot is always a lot of fun.

What is your favourite depiction of the legal profession in a TV series or movie and why?

So many, but Jimmy McGill / Saul Goodman in Better Call Saul is my favourite. He’s not a great advertisement for the profession but he fights and scraps for the little guy, and to be honest it comes much closer to depicting the grittiness and ethical issues involved in criminal practice than say a show like Suits or even Law and Order.

Dr Daley J. Birkett

Can you recount the most memorable performance in a competition that you have judged?

What is the difference between a good competitor and a great competitor?

To name but one, a great competitor will lead the judges by the hand through the story they wish to tell and they’ll use everything at their disposal — the judges’ questions, the opposing team’s pleadings (and written memorials), the (sur)rebuttal, etc. — to convey their narrative. In other words, a judge should never be uncertain as to what your story — or the answer to the problem at hand — is and, besides, where you are in your narrative at any given time.

What is the most common mistake students make when competing?

Students might stick too inflexibly to a pre-prepared speech. This poses multiple problems. For instance, if a judge asks a question at a juncture when it was not expected, the inflexible student is ill-prepared to answer the question concisely and directly or, if a student runs out of speaking time, they might fail to make their most important point on account of omitting to ‘drop’ a less crucial argument slated for delivery earlier in their oral pleadings.

Fareed Qureshi

I’ll answer this question in relation to written memorials. When evaluating memorials in the International Criminal Court Moot Court Competition, the most memorable submissions are not only those that are persuasive and demonstrate the team’s knowledge of the facts and the law, but those that also evince original thought. International criminal law is a relatively new branch of public international law. This leaves much scope for creative thinking!

MULS offers a variety of different competitions — what is one competition students should compete in this year?

I’d have to say the IHL Moot, not least because I authored the problem!

What is your favourite depiction of the legal profession in a TV series or movie and why?

Though not a depiction of the legal profession stricto sensu, I’d be remiss if I didn’t take this opportunity to recommend the 1957 movie, 12 Angry Men (based on Reginald Rose’s 1954 play) to all aspiring advocates, not to mention students of criminal justice! Set almost wholly in the jury room after the closing arguments in a teenage boy’s trial for first-degree murder in New York, among other themes, the film raises crucial questions concerning ‘reasonable doubt’ and the jury system. Please do watch it!

What is the difference between a good competitor and a great competitor?

Preparation. Competitions are generally won or lost before the competitors even step in the room on match day, as a good judge will pick the level of preparation each side has put in very quickly.

What is the most common mistake students make when competing?

Many competitors fail to understand the fundamental purpose of the competition. For example, mooters often express frustration at having lost a round in which they put a better legal case, despite presenting as far less compelling oral advocates. Researching the law is only one half of a moot. Presenting your case is the other.

Similarly, client interview competitors sometimes forget that the purpose of the interview is to try and persuade the prospective client to actually engage your legal services. Teams often do an

excellent job of debriefing the client and obtaining all the relevant information, without explaining to the client the services they can offer with that information.

Can you recount the most memorable performance in a competition that you have judged?

AVL mooting gave rise to a few interesting moments. I recall one competitor mooting while lying in bed in a onesie…

MULS offers a variety of different competitions — what is one competition students should compete in this year?

I acknowledge my bias as a Jessup coach, but still say mooting. Get involved sooner rather than later. You will learn key legal skills, make some contacts and, if you keep going, you might be the one to bring home an elusive international title.

What is your favourite depiction of the legal profession in a TV series or movie and why?

Bridge of Spies. Tom Hanks stars as an insurance lawyer tasked by the CIA with negotiating with East Germany and the USSR for the return of an American pilot. Fantastic depiction of the virtues of interests-based negotiating.

Senior Lecturer and Mooting Judge

MULS Alumni and Mooting Judge

Which MULS Competition

should you try?

We would love to hear from you!

https://www.facebook.com/ MacquarieUniversityLawSociety/ @mulsmacquarie

https://www.linkedin.com/company/ macquarie-university-law-society

www.muls.org

competitions@muls.org