UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES

PANJAB UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH

A Project Report on the Case law

“MOOTING: ARGUMENTATIVE SKILLS”

Is submitted in the subject of RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

For the fulfilment of requirement of the syllabus of BALLB (Hons) 6th Semester
syllabus

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

Dr. Navneet Arora Yuvraj Singh

Professor, UILS 3rd Year (Sixth Semester)
Roll No. 151/20, Section C
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my teacher PROF Dr. Navneet Arora who gave
me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful project on the topic, Mooting: Argumentative Skills,
which also helped me in doing a lot of research and I came to know about so many new things.

Secondly, I would also like to thank my parents and friends who supported me morally as well as
helped me in finding relevant material regarding the project so that I could complete it in the limited
time frame.

1|P a g e
 Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................................................3
MOOTING.....................................................................................................................................................................................4

COMPONENTS OF A MOOT ...................................................................................................................................................5

IMPORTANCE OF M OOTING.................................................................................................................................................6

• Networking ..................................................................................................................................................................6

• Researching and Writing Skills..................................................................................................................................6

• Building Confidence....................................................................................................................................................6

• Practical Knowledge ...................................................................................................................................................7

• Team Work...................................................................................................................................................................7
ARGUMENTATIVES SKILLS .................................................................................................................................................8

SKILLS THAT AN INDIVIDUAL SHOULD POSSESS TO EXCEL IN M OOTING....................................................9

NEED FOR ARGUMENTATIVE SKILLS .......................................................................................................................... 14

DO’S AND DON’TS WHILE MOOTING............................................................................................................................ 15

DEVELOPMENT OF ARGUMENTATIVE SKILLS ........................................................................................................ 16

CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................................................................... 17

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................................... 18

2|P a g e
 INTRODUCTION

Mooting is an imitation of a court hearing wherein participants analyse a problem, research for
relevant laws, prepare written submissions and present an oral argument. Moot problems are
generally based on unsettled law or on recent developments.

Mooting is a form of an Oral proceeding similar to that of a court proceeding practiced mainly in
institutions and universities where law as a subject is taught to see that how efficient a student is in
fighting an argument based on law. In this a proper court scen ario is created where the students act
like the Counsels (Advocates) presenting each side (Plaintiff and Defendant) on the basis of
evidences and substantive questions of law argue with each other to prove their point in front of the
judge who in the end will give his judgment in the same regard and will also declare the winner who
has performed the best. Also, while presenting their arguments the judge can question them on facts
or question them on any of the legal concepts to check the aptitude and in pro mpt adaptability to the
situation of the student.

In India, mooting started when the Bar Council of India organised Bar Council of India Moot Court
in 1981. In 1985, moot court learning became a basic part of Indian legal education. Since that time,
mooting is followed in Indian Law Institutes.

3|P a g e
 MOOTING

Mooting is a simulated court proceeding where student teams are given a legal problem to which
they are required to argue before a judge or panel of judges.

It is about developing your capacity to argue persuasively, convincing listeners to accept your
particular position or point of views.

It is not just your ability to argue but you also need to demonstrate a good understanding of the
relevant law and how it should be applied.

It is not the same as public speaking or debating although it shares some common elements with
those activities. It is a specialized application of the art of persuasive advocacy.

In India, mooting started when BCI organised BCI moot court in 1981. In 1985 moot court learning
became a basic part of Indian legal education. Since that time, mooting is followed in Indian law
institutes.

For a student who is going to become a lawyer in the near future, mooting is very important as an
integral part of his education because it will help him and make his work easy and present in a real
courtroom. It is the closest experience a student can get of a courtroom by studying in a university
or college. Mooting is an exercise which helps a law student inculcate all the habits and understand
all the policies and procedures that are followed in a court so as to prepare himfor his future. For
the same purpose, Moot Court Competitions are organized around the world so that different
students from across the globe can come in contact with other to understand each and every
dimension of the concept of mooting.

4|P a g e
 COMPONENTS OF A MOOT

• A Judge or a bench of Judges

• A moot proposition (legal problem)
• Representatives of the parties involved (counsels or team composition of
representatives, generally consisting of 3 persons, two speakers and a researcher)
• Court clerks.

5|P a g e
 IMPORTANCE OF MOOTING

Mooting helps in the overall development of an individual as a good and proficient lawyer and
participating in Moot Court Competition regularly makes a student familiar with the proceedings
that take place generally in real courtrooms. Thus, the advantages of mooting are as follows:

• Networking
One of the important features of mooting is that it helps you to connect and socialize with so many
people across the globe with whom you connect in the process of mooting. As students from
different places and colleges come to represent themselves, it gives an opportunity to get the
exposure to the outside world.

• Researching and Writing Skills

Participating in the moot court competitions helps you in enhancing your researching skills
because it is your research on the basis of which you will be fighting your case and representing
your side and it also helps you in framing a good moot court memorial on the basis of which the
other team would raise objections and question you. This will also help in enhancing your skills
as to how to adapt to prompt situations and how you tackle situations where you are at unease.

• Building Confidence
Mooting helps an individual to build his confidence in communicating and putting his view in
front of the people. It helps a person to build his confidence to such an extent that he does not fear
to question or to speak in front of anybody and can fight cases efficiently.

6|P a g e
• Practical Knowledge
Mooting helps in giving the practical implication and knowledge to the students who are studying
law in such a way which they will never find in the books and would be unaware of, as practical
and theoretical knowledge are like two different sides of the same coin and to pass the hurdle you
need to study both of them although both look same but are totally opposite in reality.

• Team Work
Moot court competitions take place in the school or colleges who organizes it and the various
teams from different colleges come and participate in the event. The team comprises of 3 students
with one as the researcher and the other two as the speakers presenting their arguments on either
side. This teaches the students to perform well when they are together in as a team and analyze
what are their strengths and weakness, how can they work upon them to achieve maximum
efficiency. It also helps to work with people who are different from you and it also teaches how to
coordinate with each other.

7|P a g e
 ARGUMENTATIVES SKILLS

Definition : argumentation is the thought process used to develop and process arguments. It is
closely related to critical thinking and reasoning. Argumentation is a very logical way of
discussing or debating an idea. When we use this technique of argumentation, we prove something
to be true or false.

It uses logic, persuasion and various debate tactics to arrive at a conclusion. When a debater or a
lawyer or negotiator follows the rules of argumentation, he or she backs up the idea with very
systematic, careful reasoning that makes his/ her conclusion strong and believable.

8|P a g e
SKILLS THAT AN INDIVIDUAL SHOULD POSSESS TO
EXCEL IN MOOTING

1. Strong communication skills: Communication skills play a significant role in a law student’s life.
Students must have good oral as well as written communication skills. A prominent part of the
skills to be possessed by a mooter is to persuade the judge by his/her convincing ability, which
can only be developed by practicing better communication.
2. Research skills: Research skills not just includes digging around the internet and gathering
information. Researching consists of an individual’s ability to gather data, filter the data to
collect relevant information, and then use it in such a way that turns out totally in your favor.Students
should be able to research the matter, case laws and analyze them in a short period.
3. Logical and analytical: The mooter’s fundamental job is to win the argument and get things in
his favor. Hence, a mooter is supposed to be analytical to understand things better and
simultaneously. Logic in the court of law can never betray an individual. All the laws are
ultimately made out of reason only. Being logical and analytical is something that an individual
cannot compromise on, especially at mooting.
4. Unquestionable people skills and mind-reading ability: An individual while mooting has to deal
with various challenges, and it becomes quite easy to deal with them; you can read people’s minds
(Human psychology), which would ultimately help get the truth out of an individual. It doesn’t
matter if you are an introvert in nature. You have to communicate with people to know them.
5. Problem-solving ability: An individual can excel in the moot court only if he/she can solve the
problem not just by his opinion but with the help of facts, laws, and he /she could support the
decision by providing evidence.
6. Know Your Case - Judges listen to counsel because, at the time of briefi ng or argument, counsel
can be expected to know more about the legal and factual aspects of the case than anyone
else. But if it becomes clear that this is not so, judicial attention will flag. If you’re asked about a
fact in the record that you’re ignorant of, or a clearly relevant case that you’re unfamiliar with and
have failed to mention in your brief, don’t expect the court to give your argument much weight.
Your very first assignment, therefore, is to become an expert on the facts and the law of your case.
9|P a g e
 If you’re a senior partner who hasn’t the time to do this, assign the case to the junior partner or
associate who knows it best.
7. Thesis statement, a claim, a proposition to be supported - every argument no matter how complicated has a
single, overriding thesis. Thesis may be qualified, elaborated, complicated or hedged all around, yet the arguer
must be able to answer what is your point. All arguments can be summed upon a single statement that the whole
discourse is designed to support.
Support - it is the reason for an audience to be convinced of the thesis statemen. A good lawyer must have some
grounds reasons or premises that support the thesis.
8. If you’re the first to argue, make your positive case and then preemptively refute in the middle–
not at the beginning or end
9. If you’re arguing after your opponent design the order of positive case and refutation to be
most effective according to the nature of your opponent’s argument

10 | P a g e
 GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF ARGUMENTATION

• BE SURE THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS JURISDICTION

Nothing is accomplished by trying to persuade someone who lacks the authority to do what you’re
asking – whether it’s a hotel clerk with no discretion to adjust your bill or a receptionist who cannot
bind the company to the contract you propose. Persuasion directed to an inappropriate audience is
ineffective. So it is with judges, whose authority to act has many limitations – jurisdictional limits
– relating to geography, citizenship of the parties, monetary amount, and subject matter. From
justices of the peace to justices of supreme courts, judges face as a first task to be sure of their
authority to decide the matters brought before them and to issue the orders requested. If they don’t
have that authority in your case, you don’t just have a weak case, you have no case at all.

Two caveats about jurisdiction: (1) Jurisdictional rules apply in appellate courts as well as in trial
courts. The Supreme Court of the United States, for example, has jurisdiction over a state -court
decision (involving a federal question) only when that decision is final, and only when there is
no adequate and independent state law ground for the judgment. (2) Defendants and appellees are
much more likely to ignore jurisdictional requirements than are plaintiff s and appellants. But
jurisdiction is just as important to them, and they must attend to it. The rules of the Supreme Court
of the United States require briefs to set forth, immediately after the description of the parties, the
basis for the Court’s jurisdiction. Even if the court before which you are appearinghas no similar
rule, it’s good practice to pretend that it does and to identify the law, and the facts, that render this
original action, or this appeal, properly brought before that court. Keep that information handy in
case the court asks.

• KNOW YOUR ADVERSARY’S CASE-At the trial stage, you must initially discern
your adversary’s positions from the pleadings, the conferences, and discovery, and by using
common sense. At the appellate stage, you can rely on what was argued and sought to be proved
below. Bear in mind, however, that lawyers tend to develop new arguments, and revise their
theories, as the case proceeds upward. Constantly ask yourself what you would argue if you were
on the other side. Don’t delude yourself. Try to discern the real argument that an intelligent
opponent would make, and don’t replace it with a straw man that you can easily dispatch.
11 | P a g e
• PAY CAREFUL ATTENTION TO THE APPLICABLE STANDARD OF DECISION
When the standard of decision favors your side of the case, emphasize that point at the outset
of your discussion of the issue – and keep it before the court throughout. Don’t let the
discussion slide into the assumption that you and your adversary are on a level playing field
when in fact the standard of review favors you. Say, for example, that you are asked, in a case
involving reviewof federal-agency action favoring your client, whether you don’t think an
interpretation of thestatute different from the agency’s makes more sense. You should respond
somewhat as follows:“I don’t think so, Your Honor, but it really makes no difference. The
question here is whether the agency’s interpretation is a reasonable one, not whether it is the
very best. And on that pointthere is little room for doubt.” Remind the court of the
favorable standard of review in yoursummation.

• NEVER OVERSTATE YOUR CASE. BE SCRUPULOUSLY ACCURATE - Once you have

worked long and hard on your case – and have decided not to settle – you’ll probably be utterly
convinced that your side is right. That is as it should be. But the judges haven’tworked on
the case as long (or, probably, as hard) and are likely, initially at least, to think it much more of
a horse race than you do. That will be true in any case, but especially when discretionary review
has been granted to resolve a divergence of views in the lower courts. You’ll harm your
credibility – you’ll be written off as a blowhard – if you characterize the case as a lead-pipe cinch
with nothing to be said for the other side. Even if you think that to be true, and even if you’re
right, keep it to yourself. Proceed methodically to show the merits of your case and the defects
of your opponent’s – and let the abject weakness of the latter speak for itself.

• IF YOU’RE THE FIRST TO ARGUE, MAKE YOUR POSITIVE CASE AND THEN
PREEMPTIVELY REFUTE IN THE MIDDLE – NOT AT THE BEGINNING OR END
- It’s an age-old rule of advocacy that the first to argue must refute in the middle, not at the
beginning or the end. Refuting first puts you in a defensive posture; refuting last leaves the
audience focused on your opponent’s arguments rather than your own. So for the fi rst to argue,
refutation belongs in the middle. Aristotle observed that “in court one must begin by giving one’s

12 | P a g e
 own proofs, and then meet those of the opposition by dissolving them and tearing them up before
they are made.”

• IF YOU’RE ARGUING AFTER YOUR OPPONENT DESIGN THE ORDER OF

POSITIVE CASE AND REFUTATION TO BE MOST EFFECTIVE ACCORDING TO
THE NATURE OF YOUR OPPONENT’S ARGUMENT - This point applies to those who
oppose motions, to respondents, and to appellees. If an opponent has said something that seems
compelling, you must quickly demolish that position to make space for your own argument.

13 | P a g e
 NEED FOR ARGUMENTATIVE SKILLS

It changes people's (opponent party and judge) point of view or persuade them to except new point
of views.

Persuade people to a particular action or new behaviour.

The main reason is because people don't always agree on what is right or reasonable, then these
aptly constructed arguments helps us arrive at what is fare or true.

It is used to settle disputes and discovered the truth. Instructors assigned argumentative writing
so students can learn to examine their own and others ideas in a careful, methodical way.

It teaches us how to evaluate conflicting claims and judge evidence and methods of investigation.
It helps us to learn to clarify our thoughts and articulate them honestly and accurately and to
consider the ideas of others in respectful and critical manner.

14 | P a g e
 DO’S AND DON’TS WHILE MOOTING

1. Don’t rush: While being in an oral argument, remember not to rush, have an adequate speed
while speaking, and clarify words.
2. Conscious Argument: Ensure that the idea presented by you is correct; it is always advisable
to write the argument beforehand to frame the theories and facts in a particular sequence,
which ultimately helps in speaking these arguments fluently.
3. Be a good listener: Being a mooter makes sure that you listen carefully to your opponents’
arguments. Mooting is not just about presents your argument mooting includes pointing out
weaknesses in the opponent’s arguments.
4. Be respectful: One can never deny that the environment in a court is always heated, but this
doesn’t give anyone a trespass to be disrespectful towards the judge or the opponents. In case
your opponent wrongly cites something, you can express it in a very polite and respectful
manner.
5. Body language: A report published by Oxford University has mentioned that mooters are
given fewer marks during moot because of their lousy body language, and specific activities
like biting nails, rubbing hands show nervousness and anxiety mooter. It becomes essential
for the mooter to moot with a lot of confidence and self-belief.
6. Be straightforward: Many people think it is necessary to make things confusing to win the
argument, but that is not the case. To get the decision in your favor, you must question the
right thing, answer the right thing along with being direct and straightforward.
7. Be assertive - You have to be assertive but with due respect. Engage with judges. Cover all
of the essential points and respond to the probable counters.

15 | P a g e
DEVELOPMENT OF ARGUMENTATIVE SKILLS

1. Don’t forget to remain calm at all times: There are not very many people in the world
that like to be yelled at. You can be sure of this. So, why do you do it? It is important to
try to not get upset and always maintain a relaxed attitude in a supportive environment,
You have to remember at all times than an argument a contrast between to points of
view.

2. Arguing well is the same as building or creating.

3. Imposition is completely the opposite of arguing: The conversation should always be

governed by understanding or mutual agreement.

4. Active listening is necessary to any discussion: As it helps one to. Be much more
productive to understand other points of view and to be able to contrast them with your
own.

5. Forgiveness and apologizing are the perfect tools to a good argument.

16 | P a g e
 CONCLUSION

“Arguing Well Is Not The Same As Winning.”

In order to argue well you have to keep in mind that the situation never stops being a
conversation. It is not a competition let’s not forget the great phrase uttered by the French
writer Joseph Joubert, “The goal in any discussion shouldn’t be triumphed, but progressed.”
The participants can mutually enrich themselves if there attitude in the argument is a positive
and constructive one. On the contrary, the positions held by the participants will be ever more
distant. Mutual benefits will turn into anger, impotence and rage.

Thus, never forget that arguing well doesn’t have to have negative aspects. You can avoid this if
the attitude with which you face this situation is the appropriate one. With patience, understanding
and a willingness to learn with others and enrich your points of view, everything is much more
convenient.

17 | P a g e
 REFERENCES

BOOKS -

• Singh, R. (2013). Legal Research Methodology. LexisNexis.

• Kopa, M. & Skarkova T(Eds.). (2012). Mootology and Mooting Skills.

WEBSITES -

• Chhabra, S. & Kumari, A .(2018, June 27). Importance of mooting. Ipleaders. Retrieved March
27, 2023, from https://blog.ipleaders.in/importance-of-mooting/

• Kaur, S. (2021, April 2). Mooting skills and why they are important (Luhadia, S. & Gadyali, M.,
Eds.). Vaidha Legal. Retrieved March 27, 2023, from
https://www.vaidhalegal.com/post/mooting-skills-required-by-the-student

18 | P a g e
19 | P a g e
20 | P a g e
21 | P a g e