STUDENT NOTES
Left to right: James Miglin, Katie Edmunds, Melissa Insanic, Professor Rob Currie, Ziad Haddad
Left to right: Robert Richler, Bryna Fraser, Professor Richard Devlin, Veronica Ford and Andrew Gough
The Jessup Moot
Trilateral Moot
Dalhousie’s 2006-2007 Jessup moot team was confronted by what was generally agreed to be one of the most difficult problems the Philip C. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition has ever set out. The hypothetical dealt with a fictional state (not unlike Turkey) which has been engaged in negotiations with a fictional international organization (not unlike an early version of the European Union). Negotiations have broken down, and a number of legal problems remain to be solved — problems which are located in some of the more nebulous and emerging areas of public international law. The team, made up of Katie Edmunds, Ziad Haddad, Melissa Insanic and James Miglin, wrestled the problem to the mat, and put in a very solid performance at the Canadian national round, which was held at the Royal York Hotel in Toronto. While placement in the top ranks was not to be, both James and Katie scored among the top 20 oralists, and the team received several compliments from judges on the quality of their written and oral advocacy. Congratulations to them on a job well done. The team itself is very grateful to the many Dalhousie professors (current and former) and Halifax and Toronto practitioners who helped out by sitting practice benches during the run-up to the moot. Special thanks are due to Professor Hugh Kindred who, as always, was an invaluable resource and source of advice. — Professor Robert Currie
This past November third-year students Bryna Fraser, Veronica Ford, Andrew Gough and Robert Richler travelled with coach Professor Richard Devlin to Portland, Maine, to compete against
32
Hearsay 2007 Dalhousie Law School
the University of Maine and the University of New Brunswick in the annual Trilateral Moot. The issue in contention was the existence of a duty of care on the Canusan army for intentional torts committed by its off-duty soldiers. Oral arguments were held over two days with each member having the opportunity to make submissions as both appellant and respondent. All teams benefited greatly from the composition of the bench, a mixture of Superior and Supreme Court Judges from Maine, distinguished practitioners from New England as well as a judge from the Federal Court of Appeal for the First Circuit. Their detailed knowledge of the case, their poignant questions and their thoughtful feedback made for a very memorable experience. The Dalhousie team placed first in the oral arguments and came in second overall. A special thanks to Professor Devlin and the other Dalhousie faculty who contributed to our success! •