STRUCTURE OF THE ADR FRESHER’S CHALLENGER

ABOUT THE CHALLENGER

a. For the ADR Fresher’s Challenger, the participating students, acting as lawyers, will
participate in a negotiation simulation. The simulation, which is based on a real-life
example, shall be a one-on-one session between 2 participants, comprising of a common
set of facts known to all participants which shall be known as the General Information
(GI).
b. The participating student shall be assigned a party that they shall represent during the
rounds, on the day of the challenger. A further set of Confidential Information (CI)
specific to each party shall be provided to them 25 minutes prior to the commencement
of their negotiation round.
c. Whilst the participating student is not allowed to create new facts, the Negotiation
Simulation is subject to reasonable interpretation and the participating student may
draw reasonable conclusions from them. Whether a participant’s interpretation is
reasonable is a matter entirely within the discretion of the Judges.
d. Failure to stay within a reasonable interpretation of the Negotiation Simulation may
result in a penalty which shall be the judges' sole discretion.
e. The official and only language of the Challenger is English.

JUDGING CRITERIA

a. The Judges shall evaluate and score the performance of the participants according to
the Judging Criteria which include the following:

i. Opening statement and effective communication: The opening statement includes a

crisp assessment of the situation and highlights the key issues that the party has
identified. Opening statements also lay out the structure for the Negotiation Session.
The participant must also be able to effectively and appropriately disclose the CI
during the negotiation session.
ii. Advancing interests of the client and information gathering: The participant must be
able to identify the key interests and positions of the client. They are expected to
advance the interests of their clients throughout the negotiation while recognizing
and accounting for the other parties’ interests.
 iii. Relationship Building: The participants should not only be able to stick to their key
interests but also recognise and appreciate the position and interests of the other
party. Participants should aim to develop a positive environment for communication
and avoid being excessively aggressive or stubbornly blocking the negotiation from
proceeding.
iv. Professional Conduct and Negotiation Strategy: The participants are expected to
negotiate in good faith. The ethical consideration of strategy, appropriateness of
demeanour and responses, response to emotions, etc. shall be taken into
consideration.
v. Mutually generating solutions and creativity: Participants are encouraged to think
out of the box. There are no restrictions on the types of solutions that they can agree
to. However, these must not be illegal or beyond their powers, as per the information
provided in the Negotiation Simulation. They must be able to present (or respond
to) realistic solutions effectively.
b. Each of the above shall be scored out of 20 marks and the maximum sum shall be 100
marks.
c. The Judges may follow the following scale while marking the participants: Excellent
(18- 20), Very Good (15-17), Good (10-14), Satisfactory (6-9), Poor (1-5).

TIME LIMIT

a. The time duration for each Negotiation Session shall be:

I. Preliminary Rounds - 20 minutes

II. Semi-Final and Final Rounds - 25 minutes

b. The Judges may after the Negotiation Session, give feedback and ask questions to the
participants relating to their strategy and their actions during the Session. The Judges
shall have discretion to impose a penalty for failing to adhere to time limits for the
negotiation prescribed herein.
c. The time limit may be subject to changes which shall be informed to the participants
well in advance. The change is solely at the discretion of the General Secretary, the
faculty in charge of the ADR Cell or that of the Judges.