NDSLS Competitions guide 2019

NOTRE

DAME SYDNEY SOCIETY

LAW

COMPETITIONS GUIDE 2019 Competitions Director: Adam Reeve

CONTENTS FOREWORD................................................................... 2 PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS ................................................ 4 2019 CALENDAR ........................................................... 4 GENERAL PRINCIPLES .................................................. 6 General Rules..........................................................................6 Competitor’s Obligations .......................................................6 Observer’s Obligations ...........................................................9 Obligations of the NDSLS ......................................................9 Dress Code ...........................................................................12

THE COMPETITIONS .................................................. 13 Negotiation...........................................................................13 Client Interview .....................................................................17 Mooting ................................................................................20 Witness Examination.............................................................25 Paper Presentation ...............................................................30

INTER-VARSITY ............................................................ 33 CONTACT US .............................................................. 33

1

FOREWORD Dear Law Students, Welcome to 2019!

Congratulations to all those who are starting their first year of law school in 2019. All the best as you embark on a journey of a lifetime! For those who are returning, may this year be one of great achievement.

As your 2019 competitions director at the Notre Dame Sydney Law Society (NDSLS), I wanted to take the chance to personally invite you to participate in our competitions program for this year.

Why Participate?

Competitions provide invaluable opportunities for students to develop their practical legal skills in a supportive, yet challenging environment.

The skills that you will learn whilst participating in competitions will assist you in whatever career pathway you choose.

The Guide

This guide contains an overview of 2019’s key dates, general guidelines, competition rules and other information to assist you in your preparation.

Most questions students have about competitions have been addressed in this guide. Nonetheless, please contact the NDSLS if you have any outstanding queries. We will be more than happy to assist!

2

What we Offer

At the NDSLS, we appreciate that each individual has distinct talents and gifts and therefore, we have a range of competitions to cater for this. The competitions team will be running the following six competitions in 2019: negotiation, client interview, witness examination, paper presentation, junior moot and open moot.

Personal experience

My advice is to have a go. If you have never participated before, start with just one competition. If you are a returning competitor, try a new competition.

As you may also be aware, all are welcome to watch our competitions.

So even if you do not participate in 2019, come along to support your fellow students and get a ‘taste’ of what it is like.

Looking forward to seeing you in 2019!

Adam Reeve NDSLS 2019 Competitions Director

3

PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS The NDSLS is undeniably a dynamic law student society and a buzzing hub of innovative and unique opportunities for all our members. We welcome and encourage all involvement with the NDSLS as we appreciate the wealth of value that participation may bring. As such, I am pleased to welcome you to the 2019 NDSLS Competitions guide, which gives you a great insight into all thing competitions – especially the competitions run by the NDSLS. I cannot stress enough to all law students the value in participating in internal competitions. It gives you an opportunity to apply practical legal skills not often exercised within the class room. It is a steep learning curve, however, one that you will carry with you throughout your professional life.

I wish you all the best of luck in your competing!

Athena Krisanaleela 2019 President

CONTACT US For registrations and enquiries, please email: competitions@ndsls.org.

For all other general information, updates and competition material (i.e. Competitions Guide, Scorecards etc.) – visit our website: www.ndsls.org.

The NDSLS is also on Instagram and Facebook—just search for ‘NDSLS.’ We post regular updates to these platforms so make sure you follow to keep up with the latest!

4

2019 CALENDAR SEMESTER ONE DATE

EVENT

Week 4 – 5: Mar 11- Mar 22

Junior Moot Rounds

Week 6: TBC

Junior Moot Grand Final

Week 6 -7: Mar 25 – Apr 5

Negotiations

Week 8: TBC

Negotiations Grand Final

Week 8 – 9: Apr 25 – May 3

Client Interview

Week 10: TBC

Client Interview Grand Final

SEMESTER TWO DATE

EVENT

Week 4-5: Aug 19 – Aug 30

Mooting

Week 4: TBC

Mooting Grand Final

Week 6-7: Sept 23 – Oct 11

Witness Examination

Week 7: TBC

Witness Examination Grand Final

Week 8:

Paper Presentation

* It is important that each competitor takes note of the important dates and maintain punctuality throughout the competition period. ** Dates and venues are subject to change. It is competitor’s responsibility to remain updated on all NDSLS communications.

5

GENERAL PRINCIPLES General Rules 1. This document provides the rules, which shall govern participation in the Notre Dame Sydney Law Society (‘the NDSLS’) Competitions.

2. The Competitions fall within the portfolio of the ‘Competitions Director’, who shall be responsible for the enforcement of these rules and the overall supervision of the competitions. a. All decisions of the Competitions Director are final unless otherwise specified in this document.

3. The email, ‘competitions@ndsls.org.au’ should be your first point of call for all problems. a. Similarly, correspondence should be via student (Notre Dame) emails. Any other source shall not be deemed as official.

4. All competitions are run in accordance to the NDSLS rules – competitors should familiarise themselves with these rules before competing.

Competitor’s Obligations 5. Participation in Competitions signifies an agreement to abide by the rules and guidelines set out within this document.

6. Participation in the Competitions is open to all students currently enrolled in a ‘Bachelor of Laws’ at the University of Notre Dame Sydney Campus.

7. In order to participate in the NDSLS Legal Skills Competitions, students must submit their registration to the Competitions in the method that he/she prescribes. a. Registration must be made through online forms – email competitions@ndsls.org for further information.

6

8. Registrations must be received by the allocated date. Late entry is at the discretion of the Competitions Director.

9. In keeping with the professional expectations of the NDSLS, we request you comply with the guidelines of the Dress Code, observable at page 14.

10.

The Competitions Director reserves the right to disqualify any team

or participant for: a. A breach of the rules in this document. b. A breach of any University and/or Law School rules. c. Conduct that is not befitting to the competitions including, but not limited to: i. Being late or failing to turn up to a competition; ii. Failing to respect the authority or misleading judges or organisers; iii. Failing to show suitable respect or misleading fellow competitors; iv. Making a serious or intentional ethical violation.

11.

The Competitions Director may hear complaints and make

preliminary decisions in regards to the above, however, the final decision resides in the joint agreement of the President of the Law Society.

12.

It is at the discretion of teams, whether they wish to use books,

notes, and other materials including props. They must, however, be realistic. a. With Paper Presentation, students may opt to utilise a whiteboard, overhead projector or a customised power point to assist or supplement their presentation.

13.

Responsibility rests with the student participants for timekeeping

and for adherence to allotted time periods and breaks. However, if resources and volunteers are available, timekeepers or timekeeping devices may be provided, but no individual associated with a

7

participant may act as timekeeper in a competition involving such participant.

14.

Competitions are not permitted to use mobile phones during the

preparation or judging period, except as a time keeping device. This must be made clear to the judge who must be able to monitor the device’s use.

15.

The Competitions Director will be contactable via email:

competitions@ndsls.org. Any other correspondence will not be considered official.

16.

Once competitions have commenced, there shall be no

modifications made to teams subject to the Competition Director’s discretion. a. Modifications to teams may be made at the latest 24 hours prior to the nominated time for round one. b. For the Mooting competitions, modifications may be made to a team at the latest 24 hours prior to the due time for the submission of outline of arguments – subject to the approval of the Competitions Director. After 24 hours a forfeit will automatically be applied and the team disqualified from the competition.

17.

If a team is unable to participate in a particular round after the

commencement of competitions, the team must forfeit, unless suitable arrangements can be made. This will depend on: a. The availability of judges and venues; b. The availability of the opposing team to reschedule; c. The reason for inability to compete; d. Discretion of the Competitions Director.

18.

Whilst all attempts will be made there is no guarantee or obligation

placed on the Competitions Director to reallocate time-slots in the event that a participant is unable to compete.

8

Observer’s Obligations 19.

Observation of the Competition is encouraged, however potential

for disruption must be minimised. a. Observers should not enter or leave the room during the negotiation session or the self-analysis period. b. Judges may, if they wish, request that observers leave the room while they confer. Apart from that discretion, observers may watch all segments of a round. c. No observer shall attempt to communicate in any way with any team members from the beginning of the participants’ negotiation session

to

the

conclusion

of

the

last

self-analysis.

Any

communication breaching this rule may result in disqualification.

Obligations of the NDSLS 20.

The Competitions Director will adhere to the ‘Competitions

Timeline’ as published on the NDSLS Website during ‘O Week’. a. This timetable may be subject to change depending on judges and venue availability and the Law School class timetable.

21.

The Competitions Director will update all competitors of changes

to the timetable, if and when they arise.

22.

The Competitions Director will endeavour to ensure minimal

clashes between Competitions timetabling and Law School class timetabling. a. Competitions rounds will generally be held in the common university

lunchtime

(12:30-1:30pm)

and

evening

(4:30pm

onwards) to help ensure minimal clashes.

23.

The competitions structure is set forth as: a. All competitors compete in each preliminary round of the competition. b. With the aim to pass on those who are stronger in the teams, the highest-ranking teams from across the preliminary rounds, as 9

determined by aggregate scores, according to ALSA Rules 3.5.1.2.1 – 3.5.1.4, advance to the Semi and Grand Finals. c. The remaining competitors from each round are ranked on a reserve list according to their scores and in the event that a competitor is unable to participate in the Grand Final, that competitor’s position is filled by the competitor ranked highest on the reserve list.

24.

By midnight on the day, one week prior to a scheduled competition

round, the Competitions Director will email competitors their competitions password for the website which will allow them access to their problem, applicable law, brief or any other relevant documents. a. In regards to Client Interview, by midnight on the day, one week prior to a scheduled competition round, the Competitions Director will email clients a brief containing a fact scenario outlining their personality and the legal problem.

25.

All decisions of judges in all competitions are final.

26.

In the event of a tie, the aggregate scores of the competition will

be used to make a final decision. This decision shall be final.

27.

Any concerns or appeals regarding competitions must be made

initially to the Competitions Director for adjudication. a. An appeal must be either administrative or equitable in nature. The results of a competition cannot be appealed purely on the grounds of a disagreement. b. In the event that the dispute involves the Competitions Director personally, the President may be substituted. i. In the event that the dispute involves the President personally, the Vice President may be substituted. c. If you are unhappy with the decision of the Competitions Committee you may appeal to the Executive of the NDSLS. This is the final level of appeal.

10

28.

If a party wishes to compete in a competition, representing NDSLS,

they must first get the permission of the Competitions Director or President of the Law Society. a. If there is more than one party interested in the position, the Competitions Director will organise a selection process.

29.

Subject to the discretion of the NDSLS, the winner(s) of the

Competitions may be invited to represent the NDSLS and the University of Notre Dame Sydney at the Australian Law Students Association Annual Conference (ALSA). a. The NDSLS is not under any circumstances obliged to invite a competitor to compete at ALSA. b. The Competitions Director may, if necessary, invite a runner up to attend in the event that the winner(s) is unable to attend the ALSA Conference. c. If suitable, then the Competitions Director may also invite persons who did not participate in the competition, but who are of a high standard and thus suitable for national representation. d. The NDSLS is under no obligation to provide financial support to those invited to compete at the ALSA Conference.

30.

All rules in this document are applied at the discretion of the NDSLS

and may be edited, amended or applied in any way that they see fit.

This should only occur in the interest of equity, fairness or efficiency.

11

Dress Code For a career in an office environment especially that of legal practise – you will be expected to wear corporate attire during all assessed components of the competition.

In addition to seeing competitions as an enrichment of the student experience and concerning preparation for the future, you should also consider competitions as instilling you with a ‘ready to work’ attitude.

As such, competitors are required to observe the ‘Notre Dame Law Society Competitions Dress Code’.

A. Ladies are required to wear a business suit or otherwise, dress pants or skirt with a tailored blouse.

B. Gentlemen are required to wear a business suit, or tailored pants, a work shirt and tie.

Please ensure you are dressed appropriately.

12

THE COMPETITIONS Negotiation In one sentence…

Negotiation is all about avoiding an entrenched position while improving your reasoning by getting the other side to agree to an outcome in the best interests of your client.

What is involved?

Negotiation is a mock mediation session where solicitors attempt to resolve a dispute. Representing their respective parties, they must attempt to reach an outcome to the negotiation that satisfies their client’s interests.

Competitors receive a set of facts a week prior to their round. The first information, the ‘general facts’, which is provided to both teams generally discloses matters regarding how the dispute arose and general party interests. Meanwhile, each team also receives a set of ‘confidential facts’ regarding their client. Using these facts, competitors must identify their client’s interests and devise a strategy for their negotiation.

Each negotiation generally runs for approximately fifty minutes, and is comprised of a forty minute negotiation between the competitors, a five minute time-out that can be requested by the teams during negotiations to discuss strategy, and a self-reflection session of up to five minutes for each team afterwards. In the actual negotiation, both teams engage in dialogue to reach a solution in the best interests of their client. However, the criteria in the score sheet should not be read as requiring that the parties reach an agreement. In some situations, the best outcome might 13

be no agreement at all. Thus, the judging standards focus on planning and the negotiation session. Within the self-reflection section, the teams discuss individually with the judge matters such as house they could have improved the outcome of the negotiation, potential mistakes in strategy and other relevant considerations.

Time commitment:

Low to moderate; usually around three hours per week in preparation.

Team size:

Each team has two members, both of whom act as solicitors.

Schedule of a Negotiation: Stage of proceedings 1. Negotiation between teams

Maximum duration

30 minutes *Optional: Five minute strategy break. Thus, combined time equates to 35 minutes

2. Self-analysis

10 minutes * Both teams will have five minutes to privately conduct oral self-analysis presentations to the judges.

3. Determination and

Five minutes

feedback

45 minutes Approximate total

*50 minutes with the strategy break

14

Judges and assessment:

The judging standards recognise that there is no one ‘correct’ approach to conducting a negotiation. Instead, the strategies and techniques used will vary according to the nature of the problem, the personalities involved and other relevant factors. However, the effectiveness of a negotiation can be judged, at least in part, by its outcome.

The criteria in the score sheet are not to be read as requiring that the parties reach an agreement. In some situations, the best outcome might be no agreement at all. Thus, the judging standards focus on planning and the negotiation session.

Judges will award each team a mark out of 100. These marks will be allocated as follows: Content

Score

1. Negotiation planning

10 marks

2. Adaptability

10 marks

3. Session outcome

10 marks

4. Relationship between teams 10 marks 5. Exploration of interests

10 marks

6. Creativity of options

10 marks

7. Teamwork

10 marks

8. Negotiation ethics

10 marks

9. Communication

10 marks

10. Self-analysis

10 marks

Total

100 marks

15

Tips and Advice The key to negotiating is to be aware of the interests of both parties within the negotiation, thereby allowing you to suggest resolutions which satisfy both clients. Your speaking time is therefore not a time for making speeches – it is time set aside to persuade your opposition to accept your case over theirs.

- Julia Lavers, Former NDSLS Competitions Director

You need to be well prepared and have given due respect to the questions posed by the facts. Your primary aim is to foster valuable communication and problem-solving skills; which are essential as a lawyer. Never underestimate a watch as a useful tool for time management when addressing the issue.

- Mark Van Der Hout, Senior Competitor, 2012 * The UTS LSS have kindly shared with the NDSLS an informative NEGOTIATION TUTORIAL they put together, which may benefit first-time competitors. Click here.

16

Client Interview In one sentence‌

Client interview gives you a legal rule and asks you to apply it to a given situation in the most straightforward way.

What is involved?

With only a very brief memorandum outlining the context of the meeting, the competition requires a partnership of competitors who will be required to conduct a successful client interview by adequately establishing rapport, gathering information and providing the client some preliminary advice.

With the facts provided a week before the competition, competitors have 40 minutes to conduct the interview with their client and 10 minutes to privately confer in a post-interview analysis, which should begin with a summary of the interview, state the relevant legal issues to be addressed, and move onto an explanation of the intended course of action. At this point in time the judge will also confer with the client regarding the proposed course of action.

Remember, you will not be judged on how much advice you give, but on the quality of your correspondence and teamwork.

Time commitment:

One of the best things about this competition is that there is very little preparation needed! You should give yourself time to read and familiarise yourself with the brief; however, client interview is mainly based on how you handle the situation and react on your feet. The time commitment is low—usually around two hours a week in preparation.

17

Team size:

The competition requires a partnership of two. The NDSLS will provide you with a client.

Schedule of a Client Interview: Stage of proceedings 1. The initial consultation and ascertaining of the problem, followed by a proposed solution or compromise for resolving the dispute 2. A post-consultation period of private conferral between the solicitors 3. Judges conferral with the client 4. Adjournment and feedback Approximate total

Maximum duration

30 minutes

5 minutes 5 minutes 5 minutes 45 minutes

Judges and assessment:

As with all consultations, there is a fee schedule. For the purposes of this competition, the applicable fee schedule is that initial consultations are free, with any and all secondary consultations standing at a cost of $500 per hour. Solicitors may discuss the fee schedule at any point during the consultation, the determination of the appropriateness of that particular point in time rests with the judges.

A. Use of the consultation fee schedule will account for marks under “Working Atmosphere”.

Judges will award each competitor a score out of 100 marks, as follows: Content

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Working atmosphere Description of the problem Client’s goals and expectations Problem analysis Moral and ethical issues

Score

10 marks 10 marks 10 marks 10 marks 10 marks 18

6. Alternative courses of action 7. Client’s informed choice 8. Effective conclusion 9. Teamwork 10. Post-interview reflection Total

10 marks 10 marks 10 marks 10 marks 10 marks 100 marks

Tips and advice The main aim of this competition is to get as complete a picture of the client’s legal issue as possible while managing their time wisely. The interviewers should keep in mind that the client may be withholding select, crucial pieces of information, and accordingly structure the session to allow plenty of time to let the client speak freely, and for you to ask discovery questions. Think about possible legal issues in considering which questions to ask, and always be on the alert for hidden facts and ethical issues relating to deceit.

- Julia Lavers, Former NDSLS Competitions Director

The best interviews are conversational in nature – there’s a back and forth quality to them, where the interviewers say something, the interviewee says something that actually addressed what the interviewers have said, the interviewers then reply to the point that has been made out to them, the interviewee responds, so on and so forth. Remember, you are not there to be tested on how much you know about a particular subject but to develop a course of action and present reasons for thinking that.

- Nicholas J. McBride, Letters to a Law Student, 2014 * The UTS LSS have kindly shared with the NDSLS an informative CLIENT INTERVIEW TUTORIAL they put together, which may benefit first-time competitors. Click here.

19

Mooting In one sentence…

A moot is a simulated appeal in a superior court, based on a mock fact scenario and judgment from a lower court. No witnesses, just good oldfashioned legal debate about whether or not the lower court decision was correct.

What is involved?

Based on the facts presented you will argue your clients position in a simulated real-life court proceeding. So you do not come across any unpleasant surprises, here is a list of certain expectations when participating in Mooting: 1. Submission of a Memorandum of Argument in the form of written submissions prior to the moot as advised by the NDSLS; 2. Delivery of oral arguments while practicing appropriate court etiquette; and 3. Ability to respond to questions or queries by the judges on facts and cases surrounding a particular point of law.

What is a Memorandum of Argument?

A Memorandum of Argument details the Senior and Junior Counsel’s

evidence for the proceeding. A Memorandum of Argument should explain the issues in the court’s judgment, identify the applicable legal principles, and then apply the legal rules to correct the errors in the court’s decisions.

A suggested structure for a Memorandum of Argument is: 1. Title page: court jurisdiction; names of plaintiff and defendant; date of document; legal representor; etc.

2. Part 1: Summary of Appellant/Defendant’s Submissions 20

a. Senior Counsel’s Submissions b. Junior Counsel’s Submissions 3. Part 2: Orders Sought – this summarises the damages and compensation demanded by the defendant/appellant a. Estimated speaking times for Junior and Senior Counsel 4. List of authorities – these are the cases referred to in the submission Will I be competing against students from older years?

The Junior Moot is reserved for students in their first and second year only. The NDSLS wants to give younger students the opportunity to explore and develop their legal skillset without having to compete with those who are more experienced.

Students who choose to participate in the Senior Moot will compete against all year groups.

What do I benefit from this?

Not only is Mooting a tremendous opportunity to really hone in on your research and oral skills, but it’s a great change for networking. We invite legal professionals to adjudicate at many of our rounds. If you impress them then you may be fortunate enough to gain a connection which may come in handy in the future.

Time commitment:

Moderate to significant – usually around 4-5 hours per week in preparation leading up to the event.

Team size:

Mooting is generally run in teams of two: a senior and junior counsel.

Structure of the Moot:

21

List of Authorities: No later than 4pm on the day before the moot, competitors must in accordance with Rule 6, email their opponent and the Competitions Director a memorandum, detailing in appropriate form: 1. An overview of the structure of the team’s submission; 2. Major arguments of the team; 3. An outline of the allotted team member speaking times; and 4. A list, five (5) being the maximum, of the authorities on which counsel rely. a. Counsel is required to provide all copies of all authorities referred to in their List of Authorities to the judge(s). Pinpoint referencing would be of assistance to our judges. b. During their moot, counsel may not refer in detail to authorities not appearing on their List of Authorities or that of their opponent. c. Counsel may not provide to the court any documents other than their List of Authorities and copies of their authorities.

The moot will proceed as follows: Stage of proceedings

Submissions of senior counsel for the appellant/defendant Submissions of junior counsel for the appellant/defendant Submissions of senior counsel for the respondent Submissions of junior counsel for the respondent Adjournment and feedback Approximate total

Maximum duration

10 minutes 10 minutes 10 minutes 10 minutes 10-12 minutes 50-52 minutes

22

Judges assessment criteria:

Judges will award each competitor a score out of 100 marks, as follows: Content

Score

1. Organisation of presentation 2. Development of argument 3. Questions from the bench 4. Speaking ability and delivery 5. Written submissions Total

15 marks 25 marks 25 marks 25 marks 10 marks 100 marks

Tips and advice My experience of mooting in 2017 was an unforgettable and undoubtedly worthwhile one. When in the moot court, I had a great experience. This is because mooting places you in an environment that is one part debating and one part acting. It’s like a sneak peek into the future possibilities of what a career in the law might look like.

I am no expert in mooting, however there are some tips I can give. Firstly, regardless of your legal prowess, make sure you sign up, you won’t regret it. No one expects your first attempt to be perfect. Moreover, mooting alloys you to practice your public speaking, legal research and the preparation of legal documents. These skills are essential for not only your legal degree but your career. Lastly, ensure that you are prepared and feel confident to counter anything thrown at you. The judges will test you on your knowledge of the case and other relevant cases, so be prepared to dodge these “grenades” (as Professor Ryan likes to call them) because they will inevitably be fired.

- James Pelosi, First Year, 2017

23

There is a big difference between knowing something in theory and being able to apply it in practice. Mooting is about persuading other people to agree with a fixed position that you have adopted by making rational arguments in favour of that position. You will moot most effectively if you attend to issues which are unclear in the judge’s mind, so treat questions with respect. Remember, mooting is a verbal reasoning test and the best way of positioning yourself to get to where you want to go in what is an increasingly competitive profession.

- Julia Lavers, Former NDSLS Competitions Director

Be prepared to discuss and reference the law to support your argument.

The judges will want to know what the law is; not what your personal opinion is. Avoid sentences that begin, “I believe” or “I feel”. In some cases, judges might ask your personal opinion. If so, give it and concurrently try to think of what legal aspect they are asking you to identify. They are trying to be helpful.

- Richard Perrignon, School of Law Lecturer, University of Notre Dame

24

Witness Examination In one sentence…

Act as counsel in a legal circumstance that enables you to examine and interrogate witnesses in order to reveal logical answers to a particular legal problem by uncovering the ‘facts’.

What is involved?

The Witness Examination competition is a simulated civil or criminal trial.

Teams consist of two students: one barrister and one non-competitive witness (roles are interchangeable).

A. As the barrister, you will act as either counsel for the defence or prosecution and your task will be to ascertain the facts of the case through the examination and cross-examination of witnesses.

B. As a witness, you must memorise the facts of the case prior to trial and must testify in accordance with the facts. It is permissible to create facts that are not in the brief, but the facts created must always be consistent with the brief.

The witness is a non-competitive witness meaning that they must be cooperative for both the defence and prosecution.

Time commitment:

Moderate – About 2-3 hours preparation beforehand.

Team size:

Two people – one mock-barrister and one mock-witness.

25

Structure of the Witness Examination: Stage of proceedings 1. Appearances 2. Opening by prosecution counsel 3. Opening by defence counsel 4. Examination in chief by the prosecution 5. Cross-examination by the defence 6. Examination in chief by the defence 7. Cross-examination by the prosecution 8. Summation by the defence 9. Summation by the prosecution Approximate total

Maximum duration

One minute Two minutes Two minutes 10 minutes 15 minutes 10 minutes 15 minutes Three minutes Three minutes 61 minutes

1. Appearances At the initiative of the Judge (i.e. “I will now take appearances”) each counsel will rise and address the bench as follows: “May it please the court, my name is ‘X’. I appear on behalf of the plaintiff/defendant”.

2. Opening by Prosecution/Defence This is each counse’ls opportunity to present the basis of the case whichever way they wish to frame it. Use this segment to outline the proposed series of facts and identify all of the major issues in a concise, confident and logical way. a. After the Defence delivers their opening – the Judge will call for the plaintiff’s first witness.

26

3. Examination-in-Chief by the Prosecution/Defence This is the process of interrogation and questioning of your own witness formally yet conversationally. The primary aim is to determine evidence logically and coherently from the witness in a natural manner.

Questions should begin by ascertaining the witness’ details (i.e. full name, address and occupation) followed by short, clear questions to engage with the witness’ story as effectively as possible. a. Leading questions (i.e. “Did you tell your mother about the incident?”) are strictly forbidden – let the witness share the story, not the counsel (i.e. “Did you tell anyone about the incident?”) b. Open ended questions are also discouraged (i.e. “What happened next?”). Be clear and purposeful with your questioning.

4. Cross-Examination by the Prosecution/Defence This stage is to attempt to discover and highlight inconsistencies in the witness’ evidence based from the submissions and the examination in chief. Counsel is permitted to use leading questions in this segment and will be judged by the clarity and quality of questioning – especially in advancing your own case. a. Do not create facts to which the opposing team will have to spend time responding. It will be regarded as unfair and will be noted for penalisation.

5. Objections During ONLY the opposing counsels Examination-in-Chief, and Crossexamination – you may highlight the opposing counsels breach of the rules of evidence by ‘objecting’. This is done to ensure proper standards

27

of evidence are followed and may waver the opposing counsels thought process.

To make an objection you stand up and say “objection” respectfully and non-dramatically. The judge will hear the grounds of the objection then either question counsel on it, or give the opposing counsel an opportunity to respond – he will then decide as to its acceptance and advise the court.

The grounds of objection are as follows: a. Relevance: i. If the evidence elicited is defined as not rationally affecting the assessment of the probability of the existence of a fact in issue within the proceeding – it is no relevant, thus inadmissible. b. Hearsay: i. You cannot use evidence of representations made out of court to prove those representations were true.

Often employed as “X told me that they heard/saw…” etc. c. Opinion: i. It is essential that witnesses testify only their direct observations and not any inferences they may form about the issue. d. Prejudice: i. If the probative value of the piece of evidence is less than its prejudicial effect, the court should exclude the evidence. e. Leading question:

28

i. During

the

Examination-in-Chief,

counsel

cannot

suggest the answer desired to ensure the witness’ true testimony.

6. Summation by the Prosecution/Defence In the closing statements – you should aim to tie together all the evidence and prove that the verdict should be in your favour. Attempts should be made to rebut the opposing counsel’s allegations/remarks whilst suggesting resolutions to conflicts in your favour.

Judges and assessment:

The judge/s will allocate a score of ‘100’ to both parties as follows: Content

1. Presentation, formalities and courtesies 2. Overall clarity, confidence and accuracy 3. Quality of objections 4. Opening addresses 5. Examination in chief 6. Cross examination 7. Summation Total

Score

5 marks 10 marks 15 marks 15 marks 20 marks 20 marks 15 marks 100 marks

29

Paper Presentation In one sentence‌ If you are someone who is interested in lots of difference aspects of law, then the flexibility to write and present about any legal topic you are interested in, makes Paper Presentation the competition for you.

What is involved?

The paper presentation competition helps you build up both your written and oral communication skills in a legal context. Three components are involved: 1. A written paper on a legal issue; 2. A presentation of that paper to an audience and a panel of judges; and 3. Answering questions about the paper and its sources.

Competitors are required to submit a paper of 2000-3000 words in length prior to the event as stipulated by the NDSLS. This does not need to be written specifically for the competition, and can be a modified essay from an assessment. As will all tertiary papers, the word limit is exclusive of the bibliography, footnotes, titles and subtitles. However, the use of any and all explanatory footnotes does count towards the word limit. In terms of referencing, the paper is to conform to the Australian Guide to Legal Citation 4.

The oral presentation is limited to 15 minutes with the primary aim of communicating the paper’s arguments in a logical, succinct and convincing manner. Simply reading your paper may not necessarily be the best way to achieve this.

There will be no questions from the judges during the presentation; however, there will be a 10 minute questioning session with the judges at the conclusion of the presentation.

30

Students may opt to utilise a whiteboard, overhead projector or a customised PowerPoint to assist or supplement their presentation whilst presenting.

Time commitment: Moderate – depends on whether you are writing a paper specifically for this competition.

Team size: One person.

Conduct of the Paper Presentation: Culminating in a score out of forty (40), the three essays which receive the highest written mark will proceed to the final.

The individuals who proceed to the final, make an oral presentation of their paper. This presentation is further awarded a mark out of sixty (60).

This score is then combined with the original score out of forty (40) awarded to the paper itself, giving a score out of one hundred (100).

Judges and assessment: Judges will award each team a mark out of one hundred (100). These marks will be allocated as follows: Written paper factors: 1. Challenging or difficult subject of interest or importance; 2. Clear definition and logical structure of ideas; 3. Analysis defines and engages with a sound conceptual, analytical and theoretical framework; 4. Argument is focussed and well-developed throughout; 5. Independent, original and insightful treatment of all aspects of topic; 6. Identifies and engages with all relevant aspects of topic and includes appropriate comparative references and insight; 7. Critical evaluation of primary and secondary sources;

31

8.

Argument is reasoned, persuasive and supported by appropriate evidence; 9. Expression, style and presentation are excellent; 10. Consistent referencing, adhering to the Australian Guide to Legal Citation; and 11. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation throughout.

Oral presentation factors: 1. Clear, concise, confident, articulate, elegant expression; 2. Clear structure and organisation, logical progression and flow; 3. Communicates ideas naturally and easily; 4. Excellent variation in tone, pace and volume; 5. Effective and intelligent use of visual aids; 6. Appropriate use of stance, expression, gesture and humour; 7. Engages with audience through excellent manner and style of presentation; 8. Conveys sincerity and enthusiasm, stimulating the audiences interest; 9. Mastery of subject matter; 10. Insightful appreciation of legal and policy aspects; 11. Detailed understanding of issues and scholarship; and 12. Direct and focussed response to questions.

Tips and advice See the big in the issue but keep things simple.

- Julia Lavers, Former NDSLS Competitions Director Start preparing for this competition quite early on into the year, you wouldn’t want to be grounded in your own assessments and study to disadvantage your potential in the paper presentation. Apart from this, treat it like any major thesis and have your friends, family and even lecturers read and critique it. Stay passionate.

- Adrian Vincent, Former NDSLS Competitions Director 32

INTER-VARSITY COMPETITIONS External competitions are often available to our most experienced competitors. These competitions offer the chance for high-achieving students to travel and compete against likeminded individuals across our nation and the world.

The following are examples of inter-varsity competitions: 1. ACU Mooting Competition 2. UTS Intervarsity Competition 3. USYD Women’s Moot 4. UNSW Negotiation Competition 5. Shine Lawyers: Moot 6. ALSA Conference Competitions 7. AMPLA Intervarsity Mining Law Moot More information about inter-varsity competitions will be announced soon!

33

Copyright Notre Dame Sydney Law Society Competitions Guide 2018 Š 2018. All rights reserved. The Notre Dame Sydney Law Society.

All content contained within this publication is protected by copyright. Content may be disseminated for personal, educational or non-commercial purposes only and sources must be accurately cited.

Disclaimer The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the Editors or the Notre Dame Sydney Law Society. The Notre Dame Sydney Law Society makes no guarantee as to the accuracy or correctness of any of the content in this publication. This publication is distributed free of charge on the understanding that the authors, editors and any persons related to in this publication are not responsible for the results of their actions or omission arising out or in connection with any of the contents in this publication.

34