GhSL
&
ELSA MALTA
Official Rules Regulating the National Moot Court Competition
OFFICIAL RULE 1.0
1.1 Organisation of the Competition
- regulations shall be cited as the ELSA-GhSL Local Moot Court Competition
- Rules;
ELSA Malta and GhSL shall jointly organise a Moot Court Competition on Maltese law annually. This responsibility will be delegated to a jointly appointed subcommittee - hereinafter referred to as the Committee.
Judges shall be chosen by the Committee;
1.2 Language
The Competition shall be conducted entirely in the Maltese language.
1.3 The Administrator
The Administrator shall be appointed by the Committee. The Administrator may not serve as coach, or in any other way assist a team registered in the Competition.
The role of the Administrator shall include promoting the Competition, receiving applications for participation, ensuring that all required information and materials are submitted on time by the participating teams, ensuring that Competition materials are available to all participating teams, receiving the written pleadings from the participating teams and delivering them to the judges prior to the commencement of the Competition.
1.4 The Regulatory Board
The Committee shall appoint a Board known as 'The Regulatory Board', consisting of the Administrator and two other persons. For the purposes of these regulations it shall be referred to as the 'Board'.
The Board shall serve as final arbiter of implementation and interpretation of these Official Rules.
Each team shall appoint its team representative from amongst its members. Communication between the teams, the Administrator and the Board shall be made via such representative.
The Administrator and any member of the Board may be removed by the Committee after being heard upon a written complaint by any interested party on any of the following grounds: gross unfairness on his part, lack of independence in the performance of his duties or total lack of performance of such duties.
No appeal shall lie from the decision of the said Committee.
1.5 Administration
The exact number of teams and the manner in which they are chosen shall be determined by the Committee.
The Local Moot Court Competition shall be held at locations designated by the appointed Administrator, in consultation with the Committee.
1.6 Responsibilities
Notice to one designated team representative shall constitute notice to all team members. Each team representative, i.e. the team captain, coach, or advisor, shall ensure that the Board has the team contact's proper address for this year's competition, and shall become thoroughly familiar with the Official Rules and Procedures of the Competition and the Problem Clarifications which shall be issued.
OFFICIAL RULE 2.0
Clarifications of the Competition Problem or Rules
Participants may submit written requests via the team representative either by mail or e-mail for clarifications of the Competition Problem or Rules. Requests for clarifications must be received by the deadline established by the Administrator which shall not be later than five days before the submission of the written pleadings.
All clarifications to legitimate requests will be summarised and posted on a date specified by the Administrator. It is the responsibility of each team to ensure that the clarifications are received and noted in preparation for the Competition.
All clarifications shall be submitted to all teams
OFFICIAL RULE 3.0
Participation and Eligibility
3.1 Team Member Eligibility
Only students enrolled on a full-time or part-time programme of study leading to an LL.D., L.P., or to a B.A Legal and Humanistic Studies at the University of Malta, are eligible to compete, subject to further requirements of these rules.
3.2 Team Composition and Selection
A team shall be composed of two (2) to four (4) student members.
3.3 Prohibition of Academic Screening
No student may be disqualified from taking part on the sole basis of academic ranking.
3.4 Outside Assistance to Teams
All research, writing and editing must be solely the product of team members.
3.4.1 Outside assistance which would interfere with the final product being the exclusive work of the team members is prohibited.
3.4.2 Outside assistance to a team in preparation of the Competition, including that of faculty members, will be limited to general discussion of issues, suggestions as to research sources and training in presentation in public.
3.4.3 Under no circumstances shall anyone who has in any way participated in the drafting of the Case give outside assistance to any of the participating teams.
3.4.4 Non compliance with these rules shall be penalised by the Board in accordance with Article 3.6.
3.5 Use of Opposing Teams' Written pleadings
No team shall be allowed to view or otherwise become privy to any written pleading other than the respective Plaintiff and Defendant written pleadings of scheduled opposing teams in the course of Competition Rounds until the conclusion of the said Competition.
3.6 Ethical Violations
All incidents or allegations of ethical violations shall be referred to the Board. Teams found to have received inappropriate outside assistance as described in Article 3.4, or to have been aided in research by persons other than team members, or to have committed acts of plagiarism, or have obtained another team's written pleadings, or to have approached knowingly any of the member of the panel for assistance, shall be eliminated from the Competition.
OFFICIAL RULE 4.0
Team Registration
4.1 Registering Names of Team Members
Each team competing in the Competition shall submit a completed Registration Form with all team members' names by the deadline established by the Committee.
4.2 Team Number as Identification
Each team shall be assigned an official team number selected at random by the Board. Team numbers will be distributed by the Administrator.
4.2.1 Team Number as Identification on Written Pleadings
Each Written Pleading must carry the official Competition Team Number, as directly issued by the Board. This number must be placed in the upper right-hand corner of the outside front cover of the appropriate written pleading, followed by a "P" for the Plaintiff written pleading and a "D" for the Defendant written pleading (For example, for team number 000, the identification of "000 P" or "000 D" would appear at the upper right hand corner of the outside front cover of the Plaintiff or Defendant written pleadings respectively.).
No names of participants or other forms of identification may appear anywhere on or within the written pleadings. Signature pages are prohibited. The Administrator shall strike all references to team members' names from the written pleadings prior to submitting them to judges.
Official Rule 5.0 – Judges
5.1 Report Judges
Written pleadings shall be corrected by a three (3) judge panel. The scores attributed by this panel shall be binding throughout all stages. Members of this panel shall not sit on any other panel of judges in any further stage of the competition.
5.2 Three judge panels
Three (3) judge panels shall be utilised at every stage of the competition except for the final round, where a larger number of judges may sit on the panel. Only persons in possession of the degree of Doctor of Laws (LL.D.) or recognised equivalent may serve as judges notwithstanding any circumstances.
The panel may however consist of 2 judges in case of unforeseen circumstances (vide 9.3.1).
5.3 Faculty Advisors and Coaches as Judges
No Faculty Advisors, team coaches, or other persons directly affiliated with a team participating in the competition may act as judge in any level of the competition
5.4 Prior viewing of teams
Judges should not view a team which they have viewed in a previous round of the competition. If a judge must view a team twice, the Administrator shall strive to ensure that the judge views the opposite side of the team's argument.
5.5 Notification to Board of incompatible teams or judges
Teams should bring to the attention of the Board the names of judges or potential judges whose relationship to their team is such that it might create an appearance of impropriety if that person judged that team. In such cases the Board should consult the judges concerned. The final decision in such matters will rest with the Board.
It is the responsibility of the team members aware of a conflict to bring the conflict to the attention of the Board immediately and prior to the beginning of the round. It shall be the responsibility of the Board to take appropriate measures where it deems necessary in the interests of the competition.
Complaints regarding conflicts not raised before the beginning of a round shall be waived.
5.6 Commentary by competition Judges
Judges in the preliminary rounds of the competition are encouraged to provide direct feedback to teams regarding the teams' performance at the completion of the round. Judges shall not reveal to teams the result of their individual determinations or the teams' raw scores.
Official Rule 6.0 – Written pleadings
6.1 Submission of written pleadings
All written pleadings submitted in the competition must conform to the following general requirements. Teams will be penalised for failure to keep within these limitations.
Each team participating in the competition shall prepare a Plaintiff and Defendant written pleading, and timely deliver one (1) copy of each written pleading in paper form and on a 3.5-inch computer diskette to the Administrators by the date of the competition deadline. The written pleadings document must be in saved in Word for Windows format. No other computer format will be accepted without the express consent of the Administrators. The written pleadings on diskette must be identical to the hard copy of the written pleadings submitted. The Joint Administrators shall issue an official receipt indicating the date, time and place of delivery. Such receipt must be signed by the Administrators and by at least one member of the team delivering the written pleadings.
Teams which fail to deliver written pleadings on time will be penalised as specified under Rule 10. Equipment failure or problems, including computer disk failure, will not be considered as an excuse for improper formatting or late delivery of written pleadings.
Once submitted to the Administrator, written pleadings may not be altered. If pages are inadvertently left out the Committee, at the written request of a team, may, at its discretion, allow such team to correct the deficiency. The Administrator may assess appropriate discretionary penalties for such inadvertence.
Only re-typing of the pleadings section to correct footnote numbers or typographical errors may be allowed subject to a revision penalty.
6.2 Format of written pleadings
Written pleadings must be typed and reproduced by offset printing, photocopying or similar process. The process used must produce a clear, black image on a white standard international A4 paper (21 x 29¾ cm) except for the covers, where coloured paper must be used. The font and size of the text of all parts of the written pleadings must be the same. The text of all parts of the written pleadings must be in Times New Roman font size 12 or larger. The text of all parts of each written pleadings, except for footnotes and headings, must be in double spacing.
The text of footnotes and headings may be single spaced, but there must be double spacing between headings and the body of the written pleadings. Quotations of 50 words or more shall be block quoted (i.e. right and left indented) and may be single-spaced.
Each page of the written pleadings (regardless of contents) shall have margins of an average of at least one inch or two point six (2.6) centimetres on all sides, excluding page numbers.
6.3 Parts of the written pleadings
The written pleadings shall consist of the following parts:
- Statement of facts
- Body of the written pleadings, including the conclusion/prayer for relief
- Summary of pleadings; and
- Additional parts
Issues or pleadings should only be discussed in the pleadings part (the body). Written pleadings including arguments or materials in any other part of the written pleadings, not included in the body of written pleadings, shall be penalised as under Rule 10.
6.3.1 Statement of the facts.
Each written pleadings shall include a full Statement of the Facts. A mere stipulation to the facts is prohibited. The Statement of the Facts shall be limited to the stipulated facts and necessary inferences from the problem. The Statement of the Facts must not include, argumentative statements, unsupported facts, distortions of stated facts, or legal conclusions.
The fact pattern of the Competition Problem is intentionally somewhat vague. Participants will be judged on their ability to make the facts conform to their arguments without changing the circumstances.
6.3.2 Summary of the Pleadings
The Summary of the Pleadings shall consist of a substantive summary of the pleadings presented in the written pleadings, rather than a simple reproduction of the pleading headings. The Summary of the Pleadings, however, should be no more than two (2) pages in length.
6.3.3 Additional parts
Written pleadings shall also contain:
1) Table of Contents;
2) Index of Authorities, which shall include corresponding page numbers;
3) Statement of jurisdiction;
4) Questions presented;
6.4 Length
The Body of the written pleadings (as described in Rule 6.3(b)) may be no longer than twenty five (25) pages. Footnotes or endnotes need to be used within these 25 pages.
If teams exceed the page limit, a penalty under Rule 10 will be imposed.
6.5 Limitations on the use of footnotes/endnotes
Either footnotes or endnotes may be used. However, the footnotes or endnotes are to be used to cite authority only. Neither footnotes nor endnotes may include substantive pleadings or examples, except for those situations where the body of the written pleadings states a rule and the footnote indicates where that rule is followed by citation to the authority. A footnote or endnote may only support material that is already stated and analysed in the body of the written pleadings.
6.6 Covers
The written pleadings for the two parties must be distinguished by two different colours. Plaintiff written pleadings must be distinguished from those of the defendant by differentiating the two sides by two different coloured, non-white covers. The colours chosen by the teams to distinguish the written pleadings are at the teams' discretion so long as neither cover is white.
Each written pleading shall bear on its cover the following:
a) the team number
b) the name of the court as specified in the brief
c) the year of the competition
d) the name of the case, and
- the title of the document (e.g. "Brief for Prosecution", "Brief for Defence")
6.6.1 Team Number as Identification on written pleading cover
The team number must be placed in the upper right-hand corner of the outside front cover of each written pleading, followed by a "D" for Defendant written pleadings and a "P" for Plaintiff written pleadings. See rule 4.2.1.
6.7 Binding
Memorials are to be bound.
OFFICIAL RULE 7.0
Oral Pleading Procedures
7.1 General Procedures
The Oral Rounds of the Competition shall consist of ninety (90) minutes of pleadings. Each side shall be allotted forty-five (45) minutes. The forty-five (45) minute allotment of time shall include the pleadings of both oralists from one team and rebuttal or surrebuttal. No single oralist shall plead more than twenty-five (25) minutes, including rebuttal or surrebutal. Any team member may act as an oralist during any round of the Competition. Only two oralists may plead on behalf of a team during any one Round.
7.1.1
If on the day of the round, for and due to any unforeseen circumstances only one of the members of a team is present, the Board may postpone the round or permit the single oralist to argue beyond the twenty-five (25) minute limit.
No single round may be postponed more than once.
7.1.2 Extension of Time at Judges' Discretion
Judges may, at their discretion, extend total team oral argument time beyond the forty-five (45) minute allocation, up to an additional five (5) minutes per team. Oralists asked to further expand upon arguments may, in this instance, appear for more than the twenty-five (25) minute individual limit.
7.2 Pleadings
The order of the pleadings in each Round at all levels of the Competition shall be:
Plaintiff 1 ® Plaintiff 2 ® Defendant 1 ® Defendant 2 ®
Rebuttal (Plaintiff 1 or 2) ® Surrebuttal (Defendant 1 or 2).
7.2.1 Rebuttal and Surrebuttal
Each team shall be allowed to reserve up to ten (10) minutes at the start of the Round for rebuttal or surrebuttal. Team members shall notify the courtroom bailiff prior to the start of the Round if they intend to reserve time for this purpose, and should announce this fact to the judges during their introductions at the beginning of the oral pleadings during the Round. Only one team member may deliver the rebuttal or surrebuttal.
7.2.2 Scope of Pleadings
The scope of the participant's oral pleadings is not limited to the scope of his or her written pleadings (submitted written pleadings). The scope of the Plaintiff's rebuttal is limited to the scope of the Defendant's pleading proper, and the scope of the Defendant's surrebutal is limited to the scope of the Plaintiff's rebuttal. No legal issues which were not addressed in the primary pleadings may be raised in the rebuttal or surrebuttal. Oral pleadings judges may penalise participants for failure to keep within these limitations.
7.3 Ex Parte Procedure
In extreme circumstances, when one team fails to appear for a scheduled Round, the Administrator, after waiting thirty (30) minutes, may allow the Round to proceed ex parte. In an ex parte proceeding, the attending team presents its oral pleading, which is scored by the judges as if they appeared against the opposing team. In such a case, the team that fails to appear for the scheduled Round shall forfeit all six (6) of the Round's oral pleading Round Points.
7.4 Of Counsel
During each Round of the Competition, one (1) additional team member may sit at the counsel table with the two (2) oralists, as counsel. The person acting as counsel need not be the same person in each Round.
7.5 Competition Communications
7.5.1 Oral Courtroom Communication between Counsel Table and Bench
Only the judges, the two (2) oralists and the team member designated as counsel may communicate during the oral pleadings. There shall be no oral communication between the counsel table and any other individual during the Round.
7.5.2 Courtroom Behaviour
Every courtesy shall be given to oralists during oral argument. Communication at the counsel table shall be in writing to prevent disruption. Teams may be subject to discretionary penalties for unnecessary noise, outbursts, or other inappropriate behaviour which distracts from the argument in progress the opposing team. Penalties imposed shall be deducted from the oral pleading scores of both oralists of the offending team.
7.5.3 Written Courtroom Communication
No written communication may take place between the oralist, counsel table and spectators or team members not present at the counsel table while the Round is in progress. This rule does not preclude, however, a team member from taking or being handed documents from the counsel table when the team member has been questioned about such documents during the course of his or her argument. Written communication may take place at the counsel table itself.
7.5.4 Oral or Written Communication Between Judges and Participants
No oral or written communication may take place between judges and participants or directly affiliated parties during any stage of the Competition, except for the courtroom pleadings and official judge's critiques, as well as those materials distributed to the parties by the Administrator.
In the event that a team or team member discovers during the course of the Competition that they have inadvertently communicated with a judge, it is the obligation of that team or team member to notify the Administrator in writing to ensure that the judge does not view the team in oral arguments.
7.5.5 Exhibits
The use of exhibits, other than official ones provided or approved by the Administrator is prohibited in the Competition. No written or other prepared material shall be passed or showed to judges before, during or after the pleadings.
7.6 Spectators
All Preliminary Rounds should be open to the public. Teams may agree in advance, and upon consultation with the Administrator, to place a limit on the number of spectators in a room at any one time during Preliminary Rounds of the Competition. Non-affiliated persons, including friends and relatives of team members, may attend any Round. Presence of coaches, advisors, or other spectators affiliated with the team in the courtroom during the oral pleadings is permitted, so long as it is in conformity with the provisions of these Official Rules. Such persons should not sit behind their team members.
7.6.1 Scouting
No team member or person directly affiliated with any team may attend a Preliminary Round in which a prospective opposing team is participating, or any other Preliminary Round other than those in which their team is competing, except as waived by the Board in the interests of the Competition. Violation of this Rule shall be considered scouting. Scouting is the observation of competitors or receipt of information regarding competitors' arguments from anyone and/or communication of that information to other competitors. Scouting by any person should be brought to the attention of the Board immediately, without disturbing the round in progress, or immediately after the round has finished. Based on the reported accusation the Board will take the appropriate action, which might result in interrupting the round in progress. Scouting will also give rise to a penalty as laid down in 10.5.3.3
7.7.1 Audio and Videotaping
No audio or videotaping of oral pleadings is permitted without the advance permission of the two (2) participating teams or the Board at the competition.
7.7.2
In no circumstances will participating teams be allowed to view any such videotape, or listen to any such audio tape, until after the completion of the Competition in which the taped Round occurs. ELSA Malta and Gh.S.L. reserve all rights to the audio and video taping, or any other form of aural or visual reproduction, of any Competition Round. All teams participating in the Competition will be deemed to have consented to taping and broadcasting of that Round.
An exception to this rule will be applicable in the case of authorised media coverage during the event.
OFFICIAL RULE 8.0
Competition Pairing Procedures
8.1 Preliminary Rounds
The Competition shall consist of a number of preliminary oral pleadings. Depending on the number of participating teams, the Board shall devise the most equitable grouping in the preliminary oral pleadings. The number of times a team is to represent Prosecution and Defence should be, as far as possible, balanced out.
Teams shall, to the degree possible, face any opposing team only once in the Preliminary Rounds of the Competition. In the event that teams must face each other in two (2) Preliminary Rounds, each team shall represent the Prosecution in one Round and the Defence in the other Round.
For the purpose of the Best Oralist Award, oralists will be judged on the best two (2) rounds in which they argue.
8.1.1 Pairings
The pairing of teams for Preliminary Rounds of the Competition shall be done, in the first instance, by a random draw. Official pairings of teams, once completed by the Board, shall be final.
8.2 Quarterfinal Rounds
If more than sixteen (16) teams are participating, then quarterfinal rounds among the eight (8) highest-ranking teams from the Preliminary Rounds shall be held in order to determine which teams shall advance to the Semi-final Rounds.
The eight highest ranking teams are to be chosen in accordance with the method of Preliminary Rounds undertaken. Hence, if teams are grouped in the Preliminary Rounds, the first or first and second ranked of each group, depending on the number of groups, are to pass to the Quarterfinal Rounds.
Quarterfinal Rounds will eliminate teams as by direct confrontation. Teams that have already met in the Preliminary Rounds, should not, as far as possible, meet again in the Quarterfinal Rounds.
8.3 Semi-final Rounds
The four highest scoring teams from the preliminary rounds shall proceed to the semi-final rounds. In the case where there are not enough teams participating in order to hold Quarterfinal Rounds, the first four(4) teams to be determined in the manner stated above under Rule 8.2, shall pass to the Semi-final Rounds. Semi-final Rounds shall be conducted pursuant to the procedures outlined in Official Rule 8.5.
8.4 Final Round
Final Rounds shall be conducted pursuant to the procedures outlined in Official Rule 8.5.
8.4.1 Sudden Death Rounds
If only two (2) teams are competing in the Competition, the Board may decide to hold Sudden Death Elimination Rounds. In such Rounds, each team argues only once as Plaintiff and once as Defendant (for a total of two rounds), to determine the winning team. In Sudden Death Rounds, the Competition scoring system shall be adapted accordingly by the Board.
8.5 Pleading Options
After having fixed the pairings of the Semi-final Rounds, the pleading options in the Semi-final Rounds shall be determined based upon the team rankings of each pairing in the Preliminary Rounds, with the higher-ranked team receiving the pleading option. Both teams shall have the opportunity to review their completed master team scoresheets from the Preliminary Rounds, but not individual judges' scoresheets or notes, for the Semi-final Rounds only. Once the pleading option has been exercised, the opposing team shall be notified immediately of the side it shall argue in the next Round.
The pleading option for the Final Round shall be determined by a coin toss.
8.5.1 Automatic Pleading Designation
Should both teams fail to exercise the pleading option, or a tie cannot be broken under the provisions of Official Rule 9.4.5, the Administrator shall determine the pleading option by a toss of a coin. The Administrator shall call the toss.
The Administrator shall notify each team of the side it shall argue in the next Round.
OFFICIAL RULE 9.0
Competition Scoring
9.1 Preliminary Rounds
Scoring of the Preliminary Rounds of the Competition shall consist of two parts: the scoring of the written pleadings, and the scoring of the oral arguments.
Each team written pleading shall be submitted to a panel of three (3) report judges, as specified under Rule 5 above. The written pleadings shall be reviewed and scored by each judge on a scale of fifty (50) to one hundred (100) points, one hundred (100) points being the highest possible score to be given by a single judge per team.
Likewise, each oral argument will be scored by a panel of three (3) judges. Each judge shall score each oralist on a scale of fifty (50) to one hundred (100) points, one hundred (100) points being the highest possible score to be given by a single judge per oralist.
Three (3) judge panels shall be used to score oral arguments whenever possible, subject to the exceptions provided by these Official Rules.
9.2 Calculation of Scoring Points
Two (2) categories of points shall be awarded to teams in each stage of the Competition: Raw Score and Round Points.
9.2.1 Raw Scores
The calculation of Raw Scores shall be subject to the deduction of Penalty Points under the provisions of Official Rule 10.0 et. seq.
9.2.1.1 Written pleading Raw Scores
The calculation of the Written pleading Raw Score for each team per Round is determined by adding together the three (3) report judges' scores for the side the team argued in that respective Round.
The Written Pleading Raw Score is determined by adding all six (6) scores for the Applicant and Respondent written pleadings combined. This total score shall be used for purposes of Best Written pleading Awards.
9.2.1.2 Oral Raw Scores
The calculation of the Oral Raw Score for each team per Round shall be determined by adding the scores of the three (3) judges for each oralist. There will be therefore a total of six scores per team (2 oralists) per round.
9.2.1.3 Total Raw Scores
The Total Raw Score for each Round shall be the sum of the team's Total Written Raw Score and Total Oral Raw Score. The Total Competition Raw Score is determined by adding the Total Raw Scores from all the rounds.
9.2.2 Round Points
9.2.2.1 Written pleading Round Points
In the preliminary rounds, the written pleading raw scores for each team are compared to those of the opposing team. The team with the higher score will be awarded one (1) Round Point.
A total of three (3) Round Points may be awarded to written pleadings in each Round. The individual written pleading judges' scores for each team participating in a Round are compared to those of the opposing team. The highest score given by a written pleading judge for each team will be compared against the highest score given the opposing team, then the next highest, and finally the lowest. For each comparison, the team with the higher score will be awarded one (1) Round Point. If a judge rates the teams equally, the point from that judge shall be split, each team receiving one-half (.5) of a Judge's Point.
9.2.2.2 Oral Round Points
A total of six (6) Round Points may be awarded for oral argument scores in each Round. The score from each judge's evaluation of the two oralists combined shall be compared to that judge's score for the two oralists on the opposing team. The higher scoring team per judge per round shall be awarded two (2) Round Points. If a judge scores the teams equally, the points from that judge are split, each team receiving one (1) Round Point.
9.2.2.3 Total Round Points
The Total Round Points for each Round shall be the sum of a team's Written Round Points and Oral Round Points.
9.3 Two (2) Judge Panels
In exceptional instances, a two (2) judge panel for the scoring of oral arguments is permissible. A one (1) judge panel is never permissible. When a two (2) judge panel is used, the adaptations in 9.3.1 shall be made to the scoring process.
9.3.1 Oral Pleading Scoring for Two (2) Judge Panels
Oral pleadings scored by two (2) judge panels shall have a third averaged score added to their total. This third score shall be determined by averaging the scores of the other two (2) oral judges. The averaged third score shall be recorded as the third judge's score.
The third averaged score may not be used for purposes of determining Best Oralist. In such a case, only the two "real" scores may be averaged with those of the oralist's other round.
9.4 Determination of Winners of the Preliminary Rounds
9.4.1 Determination of Winner of an Individual Round
The winner of the Round will be determined by Round points. The team receiving the greatest number of the nine (9) available Round Points wins the round. In the event that teams have an equal number of Round Points, the team with the highest Total Raw Score shall be declared the winner of the Round. Round Points are given precedence over Raw Score only in the individual rounds.
9.4.2 Win-loss Record
The overall win-loss record for the Preliminary Rounds shall govern team rankings. A team with a win-loss record of 4-0 (4 wins, 0 losses) will rank higher than a team with a win-loss record of 3-1 (3 wins, 1 loss).
9.4.3 Total Competition Raw Score
If two (2) teams are tied after comparing win-loss records, the Total Competition Raw score then controls and the team having the highest Total Competition Raw score from the Preliminary Rounds of the Competition shall be ranked higher. The Total Competition Raw scores are calculated by adding the Raw scores from the team's preliminary Rounds.
After win-loss, the Total Competition Raw score governs even when two (2) teams that are tied with the same win-loss record faced each other during the Preliminary Rounds, or the team with the higher raw score was not the winner of the Round where the two (2) teams had faced each other.
9.4.4 Total Competition Round Points
If two (2) or more teams remain tied after comparing win-loss records and Total Competition Raw score, the team with the highest Total Competition Round points from the Preliminary Rounds shall be ranked first.
The Total Competition Round Points are calculated by adding the Total Round Points from the team's preliminary Rounds.
9.4.5 Tie-Breaking Procedure
If teams are still tied after the comparison of win/loss records, Total Raw Score, and Total Round Points, the rankings shall be accomplished as follows:
a. If the teams faced each other in the Preliminary Rounds, the winner of that Round may be ranked higher for purposes of Final Rankings.
b. If teams have not faced each other in earlier Rounds, and time permits, a special Run-Off Round may be scheduled. The pleading option for such a Round should be determined by coin toss. The Administrator shall call the coin toss. The winner of such a round shall be ranked higher for the purposes of Final Rankings.
c. If the outcome of the determination does not affect either team's qualification for entry into the Semi-final or Final Rounds of the Competition, the Administrator should declare an official tie for purposes of the Final Rankings.
If the ranking determination is necessary for one of the teams to advance to the Semi-final or Final Rounds of the Competition and none of the methods described herein settles the tie, the Board shall attempt to immediately contact the Committee to determine the proper method for establishing official rankings. If the Committee cannot be contacted on short notice, the Board may proceed at its discretion, taking into consideration the interests of the teams and the Competition as a whole. The Administrator's decision may only be overturned by the Committee on grounds of blatant error.
9.5 Scoring Procedures for Semi-final, Run-off and Final Rounds
Special scoring procedures and guidelines shall apply to the Semi-final, Run-off and Final Rounds of the Competition.
9.5.1 Method of Scoring
The scores awarded to the written pleadings by the panel of report judges, as laid down under Rule 5, will also apply in Run-Off Final Rounds. Any penalties awarded to the written pleadings in the Preliminary Rounds shall not be carried forward to subsequent rounds.
In case of a tie in the Knock-Out Rounds, the following procedure shall be adopted:
- The highest oral score awarded to a member of a team during the Round shall be compared to the highest oral score awarded to a member of the opposing team. The highest of such scores shall determine the winning team of the Round.
- If the tie hasn't been broken, the judges shall employ a point scoring system of their individual choice to determine the winning team of that Round.
9.5.2 Preliminary Round Scores
Where the number of judges permits, the judges in Run-Off, Semi-final, and Final Rounds at all levels of the Competition shall not be informed of the scores assigned to team written pleadings or oral pleadings in the Preliminary Rounds. Their review of the teams must be independent of the Preliminary Rounds.
All penalties from the Preliminary Rounds shall not apply in the Run-Off, Semi-final, or Final Rounds.
9.5.3 Judges' Comments
Judges should always provide direct feedback to teams regarding their performance at the completion of the Round. They may not announce the winner of the round unless instructed by the Board and the Committee.
9.6 Ranking of Teams
The winner of the Final Round shall be Champion and the opposing team shall be recognised as the Runner-Up. All other teams shall be ranked according to their place from the Preliminary Rounds.
9.7 Ranking of Oralists
Total Scores for each oralist in the Competition shall be determined by adding the six (6) judges' scores from two (2) Preliminary Rounds. The total score from those two (2) Rounds shall be averaged to determine the oralist's ranking. Scores will include any penalties assessed against the oralist.
If the oralist argued in more than two (2) Rounds, his highest scores will be used.
9.8 Ranking of Written pleadings
Total Written pleading Scores for each team shall be determined by adding the Total Raw Score for the teams' two sets of written pleading (six (6) total judges scores, for a possible total score of six hundred (600) points). Team written pleadings shall be ranked from the highest Total Written pleading Score to the lowest. Ties are permitted in the ranking of written pleadings. Scores shall include penalties as per the provisions of Official Rule 10.0 et. seq.
OFFICIAL RULE 10.0
Penalties
10.1 General Procedure
The following is an exclusive list of Penalties which may be imposed upon teams in the Competition.
10.2 Types of Penalties
The power of the Administrator to assess Penalties is divided into two (2) categories: Non-discretionary (Official Rule 10.5 et seq.), and Discretionary (Official Rule 10.6 et seq.). Non-discretionary and Discretionary Penalties shall be applied against a team either as a Generic or Specific Penalty.
Generic Penalties are a general violation and apply against a team in all its rounds, e.g. delivering a written pleading late to the Administrator.
A Specific Penalty is a specific violation, and shall apply against a team only in a specific round.
10.3 Application of Penalties
All penalties apply against each judge's score, i.e. a penalty of fifteen (15) points shall have a cumulative effect of forty-five (45) total penalty points from the combined score of three (3) judges.
10.4 Minimum Scores
The minimum score for any team, per judge, is fifty (50) points. No further reduction may be made to scores after the minimum score is reached, regardless of unallocated penalty points remaining.
10.5 Non-Discretionary Penalties
For the following violations, penalties will be assessed mechanically.
10.5.1 Non-Discretionary Written Pleadings Penalties
The following penalties may be imposed only by the Board and shall be deducted from each of the individual judges' scores on a team's Written Pleading. In the event that a Written Pleading is scored by only two (2) judges under the provisions of Official Rule 9.3 et seq., the penalties shall be deducted from each of the two (2) judge's scores prior to calculating the hypothetical third score.
In instances where only one Written Pleading is in violation of the Rule, written pleading penalties may be deducted from the scores of the offending Written Pleading only.
The Board shall notify all affected teams of imposed penalties prior to the first Round of the Competition.
10.5.1.1 Tardiness in Submitting Written pleadings
Written Pleadings shall be penalised four (4) points per day up to an additional five (5) days. Written pleadings for either the Prosecution or Defence not submitted within six (6) days of the said deadline shall be eliminated from the Competition.
10.5.1.2 Failure to Include Required Parts
Written Pleadings which do not include required parts pursuant to the provisions of Official Rule 6.3 shall be penalised five (5) points for each missing constituent part. Written Pleadings having arguments or materials in any other part of the Written Pleadings other than in the pleadings part as stated in Official Rule 6.3 shall be penalised five (5) points per offending part.
10.5.1.3 Failure to Include a Statement of Facts, or submission of an argumentative Statement of Facts
Written pleadings which do not include a Statement of Facts or which are not limited to the stipulated facts in the problem as required in Official Rule 6.3 shall be penalised five (5) points.
10.5.1.4 Failure to Differentiate Prosecution and Defence Written Pleadings
Teams which fail to differentiate Prosecution and Defence written pleading covers will be penalised three (3) points for each written pleading.
10.5.1.5 Displaying Names of Team Members on Written pleadings
Teams which print or otherwise display the names of team members or other forms of identification in their Written Pleadings (i.e. on the front cover, a signature page, or in the Body or other parts) as laid down in Official Rule 4.2.1 shall be penalised five (5) points on the offending Written Pleading.
10.5.1.6 Failure to Include Team Number on Cover of Written pleading
Teams which fail to include the team number on the cover of their written pleadings shall be penalised five (5) points per offending written pleading.
10.5.1.7 Failure to Designate Proper Written Pleading Type
Teams which fail to designate the proper written pleading-type (i.e., P or D) on the upper right corner on the cover of their written pleadings shall be penalised two (2) points per offending written pleading.
10.5.1.8 Failure to Double-Space Pleadings Section
Teams which fail to double-space the Body of the written pleading shall be penalised three (3) points per offending page, to a maximum of fifteen (15) points.
10.5.1.9 Failure to Double-Space Between Footnotes and Headings
Teams which fail to double-space between footnotes and headings in the Body of their Written Pleadings shall be penalised two (2) points for every page on which the violation occurs, to a maximum of ten (10) points.
10.5.1.10.a Length of the Body of the Written Pleading
Teams exceeding the page limit, as mentioned in Rule 6.4, shall be penalised fifteen (15) points per page over 25 pages for the body of the written pleading, assuming double spacing.
10.5.1.10.b Length of the Summary of Pleadings
Teams using more than two pages for the Summary of Pleadings shall be penalised two (2) points per page.
10.5.1.10.c Type-size
Improper type-size, as mentioned in Rule 6.2., shall be penalised three (3) points per violating page, to a maximum of fifteen (15) points.
10.5.1.11 Margins
Improper margins shall be penalised two (2) points per violating page, to a maximum of ten (10) points.
10.5.1.12 Binding
Improper binding of team written pleadings will be penalised five (5) points.
10.5.2 Non-discretionary Oral Pleading Penalties
10.5.2.1 Procedure
The Board is empowered to impose non-discretionary Oral Pleading Penalties based upon consultation with the judges only. If the Administrator confirms the occurrence of an event subject to imposition of non-discretionary penalties, the penalty may be applied. In instances where the judges cannot confirm the occurrence, or the judges have provided only written commentary on the occurrence, the Administrator shall consult with the affected teams and courtroom bailiff prior to imposing the penalty.
If a team believes that a violation of a nature which would incur a discretionary penalty has occurred, the team may bring the alleged violation to the attention of the courtroom bailiff in writing within five (5) minutes of the completion of the Round. Such complaint will have to be passed to the Board immediately. Written complaints shall clearly identify the violation and the parties involved in the violation. The teams shall in no case directly approach the judges regarding a potential penalty or violation of these Official Rules. Complaints brought directly to judges will be disregarded. Teams shall approach the bailiff in the first instance, or the Administrator if there is no bailiff.
10.5.2.2 Consultation with Bailiffs
Only the Board is competent to interpret the meaning of these penalties. The judges or Board may consult with the courtroom bailiff, if necessary, to verify or otherwise confirm the occurrence of a situation giving rise to a penalty. The bailiff shall inform the Board of the alleged violation. The Board shall consult with the judges in investigating the alleged violation. If the Board cannot be located, the bailiff shall assist the judges to summarise the complaint and their impressions briefly on paper for the benefit of the Board. Courtroom bailiffs may not confirm a ruling or interpret these Rules, but may only provide assistance in verifying circumstances or the occurrence of an event.
10.5.2.3 Deduction of Penalties by Judges Prohibited
In no instance shall judges themselves deduct from the scores of the oralists any penalty points. Judges shall score the Round as if no violation occurred and inform the Board after the round of any violations occurred during the Round. Penalty points shall be deducted only by the Board.
10.5.3 Activity Subject to Non-Discretionary Penalties
10.5.3.1 Communication Between Counsel Table and Spectators
Team members which communicate between the counsel table and any other person other than judges or Bailiffs in the courtroom during the oral pleadings shall be penalised ten (10) points.
10.5.3.2 Submission of Written or Other Materials to Judges
Teams violating Official Rule 7.5 et seq., regarding the submission of written or other materials to judges shall be penalised fifteen (15) points.
10.5.3.3 Scouting
Teams guilty of scouting shall be penalised all six (6) oral Round Points for the Round. Written pleading points for the Round shall be calculated as if no violation occurred. Teams may also, in the Board's discretion, be ineligible to advance to the Run-Off, Quarterfinal, Semi-final and Final Rounds of the Competition.
10.6 Discretionary Penalties
10.6.1 General Violations
The Board may assess from three (3) to fifteen (15) point penalties for ethical misconduct and violations of these Official Rules not specifically listed under Non-Discretionary Penalties after a complaint in writings is served on the Board. Such complaint must be served within one (1) hour from the termination of the session in respect of which the complaint is being raised. The size of the penalty shall correspond to the degree of the violation in the judgement of the Board.
Discretionary penalties shall only be imposed by the Board.
10.6.2 Activity Subject to Discretionary Penalties
10.6.2.1 Unsportsmanlike Behaviour by Team Members or Affiliated Persons
The Board may, after consultation with judges and the Bailiff, impose up to a fifteen (15) point penalty against a team for behaviour which substantively prejudices the conduct of the Competition, including, but not limited to:
(a) engaging in poor sportsmanship;
(b) submitting petty and verbose complaints against other teams;
(c) inappropriate behaviour at the counsel table during the Oral Rounds;
- inappropriate discussion with oral pleading judges before their submission of scores at the end of a Round;
- blatant disregard for the procedures or requirements outlined in the Official Rules of the Competition.
A penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct in the courtroom must be witnessed by at least the bailiff or one judge in the courtroom. In all cases, the Board shall hear from both teams, the accuser and the accused, and consult with the bailiff and judges before making a final determination.
Penalties for unsportsmanlike behaviour may be imposed in addition to any other penalties which may have been imposed under the provisions of these Official Rules.
10.6.2.2 Activity of Affiliated Persons
Coaches or advisors must not talk to, sit near or directly behind either team and not communicate with either team during the oral pleadings. In this eventuality the Board has the discretion to impose from three (3) to fifteen (15) point penalties
10.7 Notice to Teams
The Board shall notify teams of the imposition of such penalties prior to the beginning of the Preliminary Rounds of a Competition.
OFFICIAL RULE 11.0
Interpretation of Rules
11.1 General
Questions concerning the interpretation of these Rules during the Competition must be submitted to the Board.
Bailiffs, administrative assistants and judges are not authorised to interpret these rules, but they may be consulted as witnesses of alleged violations of these Official Rules.
OFFICIAL RULE 12.0
Awards
12.1 Best Written pleading Award
The winner of the Best Written pleading Award in the Competition shall be the team with the highest Total Written pleading Raw Score. The highest possible score is six hundred (600) points.
All written pleadings in the Competition become the joint property of The Law Society (GhSL) and European Law Students' Association (ELSA-Malta), and shall not be republished without their express consent.
12.2 Best Oralist Awards
The winner of the Best Oralist Award in the National Competition shall be the oralist with the highest averaged score from the Preliminary Rounds.
12.3 National Competition Winners
Champions of the Competition shall be the winning team from the Final Round of the Competition.
Runners-up shall be considered the second place team in the Competition.
Other awards may be awarded by the Board upon consultation with the Committee and in accordance with these Official Rules.
|
