|
|
|
Frequently asked questions
Administration
Frequently asked questions
Administration
Who is eligible to register a team in the Vis (East)?
Every law school is eligible. Schools that are not law schools are normally also eligible if the study of law is part of the program.
Who is eligible to be a member of a team?
Team members must be registered students as of the cut-off date, which is the day that the memorandum for claimant is due in December. Students working for a masters or doctor degree are also eligible, unless they have been admitted to the practice of law. In case of doubt as to the eligibility of a student, send a detailed enquiry to: info@cisgmoot.org
What must be done for a team to register?
There are three steps for a registration to be definitive:
Why is submission of the memorandum for claimant by the due date considered to be part of the registration process?
The memorandum for claimant of each team is sent to another team, which is to prepare a memorandum for respondent in reply. This is done immediately after the due date for the submission of the memorandum by e-mail has passed. Those two teams will also argue against one another on either Tuesday or Wednesday at the orals in Hong Kong. Experience has shown that a certain number of teams that have submitted a registration form will fail to submit the memorandum for claimant by the due date. Since it is not possible to pair that team with another team for the exchange of memoranda, that team may no longer participate.
What is the total cost for a team to participate in the Vis (East)?
The total cost for a team to participate depends on a number of factors that vary from one team to another. The one element of cost that is the same for all teams is the registration fee of US$800 or HK$6,250.
The other items of expense vary depending on such factors as the number of team members, the cost of travel to Hong Kong, the level of accommodation and of food that are expected. Teams preparing a budget for the first time may wish to ask the advice of other teams in a comparable situation that have already participated. The items of expenditure are apt to be:
Does the Moot assist in finding housing?
No. However, a list of hotels, pensions and youth hostels with their web sites is posted on the Vis (East) web site. Many teams pass on advice to subsequent teams from their school as to appropriate places to stay.
How many team members should there be?
The rules require that there be two members of every team in each oral argument. Therefore, there must be a minimum of two team members. There is no limit to the number permitted to be on the team. In the past, teams have had between two and thirteen members. The numerical average is about 5.5. It appears that the optimal number is normally between four and six. This allows for a division of the research work and permits practice oral arguments within the team. While a team of four obviously costs more than does a team of two, it does not cost twice as much since the registration fee is the same. More importantly, it appears that team members of teams consisting of four to six students normally gain more educationally than do members of teams of two students only.
How long should a team plan to stay in Hong Kong?
Although the arguments in which all teams participate are Tuesday through to Friday, a major educational benefit of the Moot arises out of the social contact with the other students and the arbitrators. Therefore, participants gain the maximum benefit from the Moot if they arrive in time for the Welcoming Party on Monday night prior to the official opening of the Moot and if they remain through the Awards Banquet the following Sunday. Teams traveling from a distance might want to arrive a day or two early to acclimatize to the weather and time zone, and to visit Hong Kong and possibly Macau.
Should a professor or coach accompany the team to Hong Kong for the oral arguments?
Between half and two-thirds of the teams are accompanied by a professor or coach. It may be helpful to the team to have an opportunity for discussion of their performance while it is still fresh. Professors and coaches who attend the oral arguments become more involved in the Moot and give clearer guidance to future teams. Many of the professors and coaches also participate as arbitrators and thereby have a better opportunity to share experiences with the other arbitrators.
What should participants wear at the moot?
Normal business attire is the best option for the oralists. Outside, remember that Hong Kong is in a sub-tropical region. March temperatures average 18-24o Celsius. Rain is a distinct possibility, although normally the rainy season begins in April. Some establishments, including the venue for the Awards Banquet, do not admit persons wearing denim jeans or trainers (gym shoes). National dress is welcome and encouraged, especially for the Awards Banquet. For the Saturday evening boat trip, flat non-marking rubber sole shoes are required.
Memoranda
Are the memoranda of the winners of past Moots, which are posted on the web site, a good guide to the style in which a memorandum should be written?
Yes, of course, with one important qualification. The rules for the Tenth (Vienna) Moot were modified in regard to the formatting requirements, so that the earlier memoranda should not be followed as a guide in that respect. Moreover, there is now clearer guidance that the memoranda are to be written to advocate the position of the claimant or the respondent, as the case may be. Academic discussions of the relevant law seldom make effective advocacy.
What are the best authorities to rely upon in the memoranda and in oral argument?
This question raises one of the difficulties for a practitioner as well as a participant in the Moot. Lawyers (and therefore arbitrators) from a common law background tend to consider decisions of appellate courts as particularly persuasive while lawyers from a civil law background tend to be more persuaded by the doctrinal writings of eminent professors. A judicious mixture is probably the best. Of course, the text of the relevant statute, convention, contract provision or rule is always the highest authority.
Should the authorities relied upon be limited to those in the English language?
The Moot is in English and all the participants, both student and arbitrator, will be familiar with it. Some will be able to read only English. English language authorities are, therefore, the only ones that one can be sure all the competing teams and the arbitrators will be able to read. That, however, poses a serious problem. The English language, the common law and common law reasoning are closely associated. Authorities from civil law countries often present different points of view in regard to the legal issues that arise in the Moot and they should obviously not be disregarded. Fortunately, many are also available in English.
It might be noted that a common failing of some teams in the Moot, and more seriously of some lawyers in practice, is to rely only upon the authorities from one's own legal system.
Is there a standard bibliography of doctrinal writings of the most eminent professors in regard to the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods and international commercial arbitration?
Not as such. The CISG web site for the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods of which this is a part has as complete a bibliography as exists. All known judicial decisions are cited and many are available from the web site in the original language (by link to other web sites for non-English decisions) or in English translation. Many of the more important articles or extracts from books relevant to particular articles of the Convention are also available on the web site.
There is nothing comparable for international commercial arbitration. Research on the arbitration issues will, therefore, be particularly difficult for some teams.
Oral Arguments
How should the arbitrators be addressed?
Arbitrators in the Moot and in real arbitrations are normally lawyers and law professors and they should be addressed as one would address such persons.
Do the participants stand or sit when presenting their arguments?
Everyone is seated. The student participants and the arbitrators are seated at tables arranged in a U formation with the arbitrators in the middle, and the advocates on the two sides.
Do the arbitrators permit or expect the students to present their arguments without interruption or do they ask questions during the argument?
Arbitrators who come from different legal systems tend to have different expectations. Those who come from a civil law background tend to ask fewer questions and to ask those questions at the end of a presentation by the advocate. Those who come from a common law background tend to ask questions from the beginning and sometimes do not allow the advocate to make a systematic argument at all. Whenever possible the panels of three arbitrators for each argument are composed of lawyers/law professors from both backgrounds. As a consequence, advocates must be prepared both to present a coherent reasoned argument without interruption and to have the entire period occupied by questions - or something in between.
What is the best preparation for the oral arguments?
Obviously it is necessary to start with knowing thoroughly the facts of the problem, the legal issues and the arguments in favor of the claimant or the respondent, as the case may be. There should be practice arguments in front of arbitrators who know the problem. Those arguments may be within the team or against other teams, if it is feasible to do so. It is particularly useful, again if possible, to argue against teams from other legal systems and in front of arbitrators from other legal systems or who, at least, have some experience with other legal systems.
If a team is composed of four (or more) students, should two of them specialize as advocates for claimant and two for respondent?
That is one way to organize a team and it may give more security to some students. It is not, however, considered the ideal way to organize a team. The problems in the Moot, like many or most disputes that go to litigation, can be argued successfully for either side. The arguments for one side are never completely understood unless the arguments for the other side are also understood. The Moot rules encourage students to argue both sides by providing that the Award for Best Individual Oralist is awarded only to a student who has argued at least once for claimant and at least once for respondent.
Is there a video available of the oral arguments?
There is a video available of the Third and Fourth Vis East finals. To order a copy, contact us at info@cisgmoot.org. In addition, Prof. Dr. Klaus Peter Berger of the University of Cologne and Director, Center for Transnational Law, has prepared Arbitration Interactive, which is the best set of teaching materials for students and young practitioners on the conduct of an international commercial arbitration that exist. In 16 Scenarios, the reader is guided through the business relationship between a Dutch and a Swiss company, from the negotiations of an export contract, the commencement of an international arbitration, the arbitral hearings, to the enforcement of the final award. The materials consist of a book accompanied by a DVD in which experienced practitioners of commercial arbitration (all of whom participate as arbitrators in the Moot) act out the arbitration. What you see on the DVD as a typical arbitration is what you will experience in the oral arguments. These materials are enthusiastically recommended.