NAMING THE COMPETITION
The reform brought about in Indian legal education by the pioneering efforts of Prof. (Dr.) N.R. Madhava Menon in the last three decades by introducing Five Year Integrated B.A.LL.B. programme under the National Law School experiment is the inspiration for Lloyd Law College sponsoring the Mooting Competition in his name. On retirement from active service, he continues to contribute to the cause of legal education and professional development through the Menon Institute of Legal Advocacy Training (MILAT), which he presides. Lloyd Law College is proud to be associated with MILAT and Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF) in launching the Mooting event for the benefit of law students of South Asian countries.
Fourth Prof. N. R. Madhava Menon SAARC Mooting Competition, Law Students’ Conference & Judges Colloquium 2019 is to be organized by Lloyd Law College under technical support from MILAT-Menon Institute of Legal Advocacy, Trivandrum and Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF) at Lloyd Law College, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India. There are two stages of the competition. The Indian Round and the SAARC Round for India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Bhutan, Nepal and Maldives. Indian Round was held on Saturday 27 & Sunday 28 Oct, 2018 at Lloyd Law College, Greater Noida. The two Best Law Student Awardees (male & female) will be chosen from the top seven teams selected at the Indian Round by a competent Jury to receive a fellowship of $ 51,000/- from Penn State School of Law to pursue LL.M. from Penn State University Law School, United States.
India Round witnessed the presence of fifty two teams from the best of all the law schools in India. Eight teams progressed to the SAARCLAW Round that is scheduled to be held during Feb. 15-18 2019.
DAY-1(15th FEBRUARY 2019)
2:50 PM: Fasten your seat belts and brace yourselves, the moment we were waiting for has come!
2:52 PM: And here we begin….!
2:56 PM: Lloyd welcomes law students from the SAARC Nations with lots of enthusiasm and energy.
3:00 PM: The teams are super excited as they head towards the Lecture Hall 3 for the registration.
3:08 PM: The teams have gathered and are waiting for the registration to begin.
3:23 PM: The registration finally begins!The teams are being briefed with the rules and regulations of the competition.
3:25 PM: We, the blogging team is here to keep you updated through out the event.
3:38 PM:There is a palpable nervous excitement among the participants who are keenly waiting for their registration to get done in Lecture Hall 3.
3:53 PM: There is a very well quote given by Roy T. Bennett, in which he says that “More smiling, less worrying. More compassion, less judgment. More blessed, less stressed. More love, less hate.”
This is the prefect quote that can be used to demonstrate the current scenario of the participants.
4:15 PM: To get the experience of the live streaming of the event do follow us on – https://instagram.com/lloydlawcollege?utm_source=ig_profile_share&igshid=12jjo6gotvwsv
4:30 PM:The Participants have been asked to submit the copy of the memorials and after that they are suppose to head for high tea.
4:41 PM:The teams are now going for high tea and are requested to be back before 5:15 PM at the same place for the draw of lots.
5:15 PM: The participants have returned from the high tea and are now heading towards lecture hall 3 for draw of lots.
5:30 PM– Draw of lots is about to begin.
5:50 PM– Mr. Manohar Thairani,President, Lloyd Law College with other dignitaries is addressing the respected teams and wishing them luck.
6:02 PM– Dr. Lisa P Likose is intimating the participants, very rigorously, about the rules of the competition. She chooses to focus on the “DON’TS” of the competition and expresses her expectation of complete and absolute competence from the participants with regards to how they present themselves in the competition.
She further notifies the participants of every detail (regardless of their importance) of the rules and establishes that strict action will be taken if any of them are broken.
6:19 PM- Draw of lots has begun.
6:25 PM– The result of draw of lots for preliminary round 1 is as follows:-
SR 011 v. SR 013
SR 012 v. SR 06
SR 04 v. SR 010
SR 03 v. SR 09
SR 07 v. SR 015
SR 016 v. SR 02
SR 019 v. SR 01
SR 05 v. SR 018
SR 014 v. SR 08
6:35 PM– Draw of lots has been followed by exchange of memorials.
6:40 PM– The result of draw of lots for preliminary round 2 is as follow:-
SR 03 v. SR 013
SR 016 v. SR 06
SR 014 v. SR 010
SR 012 v. SR 09
SR 04 v. SR 015
SR 011 v. SR 02
SR 05 v. SR 01
SR 07 v. SR 018
SR 019 v. SR 08
6:50 PM– With this, the sun sets on the green ground of Lloyd. See you when the sunflowers bloom. Blogging team is here at a routine overhaul to keep you posted with the latest updates as the event proceeds.
DAY-2(16th FEBRUARY 2019)
9:15 AM– Top of the morning to you! Another day and the journey continues. We are back today with more live updates. As the second day begins, and 18 teams will battle in the Prelims Round 1. So, participants and readers, buckle up as it is going to be a bumpy ride.
9:20 AM– It seems that our teams are very punctual since they have started arriving.
9:25 AM– Some teams dressed in their traditional attire have arrived and the remaining are supposed to come.
9:30 AM– The teams are served with the breakfast .
9:32 AM– The teams are proceeding for a group photograph with our Chief Guest and other dignitaries.
9:50 AM– All the teams have taken their seats in the seminar hall for the Inauguration Ceremony.
9:55 AM– The Hon’ble Chief Guest have arrived in the seminar hall and we have begun with the Inauguration Ceremony.
10:04 AM- The Chief Guest , Guest of Honours and other dignitaries are being felicitated with mementos.
10:07 AM– “Darkness cannot drive out darkness,only light can do that.”Now the Hon’ble Chief Guest is heading forward to lighten the lamp.
10:17 AM– Lightening of lamp is followed by one minute silence for all the soldiers who lost their lives in the Pulwama Attack.
10:21 AM– Mr. Manohar Thairani, President of Lloyd law college while addressing the gathering introduces the dignitaries on the panel.
10:33 AM- Mr. Manohar Thairani continues with his speech but a notable point of his speech is the fact that he stresses among the participants the equal importance of engaging themselves in a social and cultural exchange and the importance of doing well in the competition as well. He concludes his speech by wishing the participants luck.
10:38 AM– Prof. (Dr.) S. Shiva kumar takes the podium after Mr. Manohar Thairani and welcomed all the judges and the Chief Guest Mr Arun Mishra to attend and be a part of this SAARCLAW mooting competition. At last he wish all the teams luck and seek them to learn and experience something worth for them from this competition.
10:43 AM– Esteemed Guest Professor Dr. N.R. Madhava Menon (The Father of Modern Law in India) has started his speech.
11:00 AM– Mr. Md Mohsen Rashid, Secretary General, SAARCLAW in his speech mentions deplorable acts of inhumanity happening around the world, the most relevant example being the terror attack that happened two days ago in J&K and is sincerely requesting the participants and law students in general to do, to the best of their abilities, all they can to ensure that democracy, peace and liberty is maintained in the free world.
11:07 AM– Hon’ble Mr. Justice Priyantha Jayawardena , Judge Supreme Court of Sri Lanka start delivering his speech where he is talking about the principles of interpretation and the significance of constitution in a nation. He is talking about the dynamic meaning of constitution as well as amendments.
11:20 AM– Releasing the book “Disaster Management” edited vol. by Hon’ble Judge Arun Mishra in SAARC Countries and Lloyd law college launches two of its journal Lexigentia and Lloydians. The journal is being handover by the Director Md. Salim to all the dignitaries.
11:40 AM– Mr. Arun Mishra in his speech stresses the importance of “teamwork” regardless of the level of profession one finds themselves in, whether it is in legal practices, mooting, advocacy, etc. He also stresses the equal importance of “respect” towards one’s opponents.
11:50 AM– Concluding his enthusiastic speech Hon’ble Mr.Justice Arun Mishra talked about the importance of hardwork and teamwork .He also congratulated the organizers for conducting such an event in the last words of his concluding speech.
11:52 AM– Justice Arun Mishra has facilitated Mr. Ravi Prakash with momento who made the Moot problem for the SAARC round.
11:58 AM– The program here by concluded by SAARC Anthem followed by National Anthem.
12:50 PM– Teams are proceeding towards their respective court rooms.
PRELIMINARY ROUND 1:
COURT ROOM NO. 1A
1:00 PM– Both Petitioner and Respondent have arrived in the room.
1:03 PM– Judges have arrived.
1:04 PM– The petitioner speaker 1 has started with his pleading.
1:05 PM– Petitioner speaker starts the pleading with full enthusiasm.
1:09 PM– Judges asks some questions regarding the status of UN, the speaker answers to it without stumbling.Seems like the petitioner speaker is in best of their confidence level.
1:17 PM– Judges asks the petitioner speaker to provide with relevant source regarding the facts of the case, unfortunately they fail to do so.
1: 19 PM– TIME OVER
1:22 PM– Though the time has ended ,the speaker continues to present the facts while one of the judge remarks that the meaning of ‘Refugee’ from the petitioner side was not clear to them.
1:25 PM– Petitioner speaker 1 somehow tries to answer it and ends her part of presenting.
1:31 PM– Petitioner speaker 2 comes to the dias and starts presenting her part of the case.
1:32 PM– Judges raises some of the question which were not able to answer by the 1st speaker.
1:32 PM– Speaker 2 tries to answer to their question although she looks bit frustrated.
1:36 PM– Judges points out some important aspects in the field of human rights bringing the speaker 2 back in track.
1:39 PM– Speaker 1 can be seen passing points to the speaker
1:41 PM– The petitioner speaker 2 fails to answer the meaning of ‘persecution’.
Judges seem to be unconvinced .
1:43 PM– 2 MINUTES LEFT.
1:45 PM– Judges request the petitioner representative to provide with relevant evidence regarding the case.But they fail to present the evidence before them.
1:46 PM– TIME OVER.
1:47 PM– The case covers many areas of human rights, rights regarding the refugees etc.
1:50 PM– Judges points out the Principle of proportionality.
1:51 PM– The petitioner speaker 2 is concludes with her part of presenting the case.
1:53 PM– The petitioner representatives have completed their part.
1:55 PM– The Respondent speaker 1 comes to the dais and with a medium tone she starts presenting the facts .
1:58 PM– The first question pointed out by the judges to the Respondent speaker 2 was regarding Article 34(2) of ICJ which the speaker fails to answer.
2:02 PM– Judge questions the Respondent speaker Whether UN convention on refugees has been recognized as a customary law?
2:05 PM- Judge eagerly waits for the answer to some question which she have already asked to the petitioner side and it seems like judges are not satisfied with the answers given by both the sides pertaining to some highlighting questions.
2:10 PM– The Respondent speaker 1 tries her best to satisfy the judges.
2:13 PM– Question regarding the citizenship act has also been raised by the jury.
2:14 PM– TIME OVER
2:15 PM– Respondent speaker fails to answer the gravity of national security. A fall in confidence level can be seen in the speech.But manages and continues.
2:24 PM– The Respondent speaker 2 starts his pleading while judges reminds them to use their aloted time.
2:27 PM– 5 minutes left
2:27 PM- The Speaker is presenting the facts but judges seem to be unconvinced with the way of presentation.
Speaker 1 from the Respondent side can be seen passing notes to speaker 2 to support the statements .
2:33 PM- The Speaker 2 continues though he seem to be nervous.
2:37 PM- The counsel tried to mislead the jury regarding to some part of their argument which led to a displeasure among the jury.
2:44 PM– REBUTTAL
Speaker 2 in an energetic way starts the rebuttal from the petitioner side.
Clarifying and answering the question which were left to them by the Respondent.
2:47 PM– Judges can be seen convinced with her counter arguments.
2:49 PM– Speaker 1 from Respondent side without adding any new points to her argument concludes her part.
2:51 PM- The Jury starts filling the score sheet.
2:53 PM– The Jury hands over sealed score sheet to the court masters.
COURT ROOM NO. 1B
12:50 PM– The respondents have arrived and are asking the court masters about the timings of the pleadings and clarifying their doubts.
12:52 PM– Now the Petitioner have also arrived in the court room they are tensed and flipping the pages and also arranging the documents.
12:55 PM– Both the teams are waiting for the judges to come.
12:58 PM- The judges have arrived and are checking the score sheets.
1:00 PM– Now the counsel 1 from Petitioner side seeks the permission and has started giving the synopsis.
1:10 PM– The judge asked her the question to which the counsel replied that this question will be dealt by the co-counsel.
1:20 PM– The judges are throwing bunch of questions but the judges are not satisfied by the answers of the councilor.
1:30 PM– The counsel 1 concluded her pleadings.
1:35 PM– The speaker 2 is pro efficient but a fast orator.
1:40 PM– Now the Respondent speaker 1 has begin with her pleadings. She is confident and fluent.
1:50 PM– She impresses the judges by her arguments. The judges don’t ask her much questions.
1:56 PM– Speaker 2 seeks the permission from the judges. She is a good orator.
2:05 PM– Respondent side seeks prayer.
2:09 PM– The rebuttal has begin.
2:13 PM– Its a neck to next competition. The speaker from Respondent side has answered to all the questions raised.
2:15 PM- Time is over and the judges asked the participants to step out.
2:18 PM– The judges handed over the score sheets to the court masters.
COURT ROOM NO. 1C
1:00 PM– Respondent and Petitioner arrived in the room.
1:03 PM– Judges have arrived in the court room.
1:05 PM– Speaker 1 from the petitioner side started the pleadings
1:15 PM– The petitioner is talking about the article 36 of ICJ and also article 2 of the UN charter resolving problems by peaceful arms.
1:17 PM– The judges are asking questions about the jurisdiction to the petitioner.
1:20 PM– Petitioner looks worried as the judges are questioning him simultaneously.
1:27 PM– Speaker 2 has started her pleading.
1:35 PM– Judges are continuously cross questioning speaker no. 2 on refugee protection laws.
1:39 PM– Speaker no. 2 has been questioned regarding the grounds on the basis of which they are claiming that their legitimate expectations has been breached.
1:44 PM– Petitioners are done with their pleadings. Now speaker 1 from the respondent side has started her pleading.
1:50 PM-The judges are asking questions about the human rights disputes to the respondent.
TEN MINUTES LEFT.
2:02 PM– Speaker 2 from the respondent side is being showered with questions. She is being questioned on her knowledge of facts and issues that she’s dealing.
2:17 PM– The respondents are done with their arguments. Now the speaker 1 from the petitioner side is rebutting the arguments given by the respondents.
2:27 PM-Pleadings are over.
COURT ROOM NO. 2A
1:00 PM– Judges have arrived and court masters have taken their seats.
1:13 PM– Speaker 1 from the petitioner side starts the pleading.
1:15 PM– Judges are asking questions to the speaker and speaker confidently give the answer.
1:16 PM– Speaker 1 asked to call co-counsel to approach the dais and proceed with the rest of the issues.
1:17 PM- Speaker 2 started pleading.
1:20 PM- Speaker calmly dealing with the issues and giving answer to the question of judges.
1:33 PM– Speaker 2 ask for extra 2 minutes. Judges grant her extra time .
1:36 PM-Respondent 1 started pleading .
1:42 PM– Speaker 1 start with the jurisdiction and briefing of the facts.
1:48 PM-The judges are asking questions about the water scarcity to the respondent 1.
1:50 PM– Respondent is giving answer to the question and pass the compendium to the judges.
1:52 PM– Speaker asked co-counsel to approach on dais and dealt with the rest of the issues.
1:53 PM- Speaker gives answer to the question and seems to be nervous.
1:54 PM– Judges are done with the questions and now calculating score sheet and pleading are over.
COURT ROOM NO. 2B
1:08 PM- Judges have arrived.
1:10 PM- The Petitioner have started pleading.
1:20 PM- The questions asked by judges were hard indeed,but the Pleader had proven his worth and answered the question without cogitating too much.
1:20 PM- Speaker 1 of the Petitioner is speaking confidentially.
1:22 PM- Judge 2 ask about article 292 of Constitution and the speaker answers properly.
1:26 PM- The court master announced that the time is over. Speaker 1 ask for an another minute. Speaker 1 concluded and started his prayer.
Judges makes remarks
1:29 PM– The respondent have stared pleading.
1:34 PM– Speaker 1 of the respondent speaker with confident and the fluency of the speaker is very good.
1:37 PM– The speaker 1 has been questioned to which she has answers, the judges look satisfied.
1:39 PM– Time Over ,the judge granted 1 minute, speaker 1 concluded with prayer.
1:40 PM-Speaker 2 of respondent have started speaking .She seems to be confident and her fluent.
1:43 PM– Judges started asking about jurisdiction of refugees and the answer of respondent 2 seems to have satisfy the judges.
1:47 PM– The judges asks questions about issues 2 of the case and the speaker seemed to be struggling with the questions.
1:54 PM- FIVE MINUTES LEFT.
1:58 PM– The judges are throwing questions at speaker about the case and she answered the questions from her arsenal the judges seemed to be impressed.
1:59 PM-Time Over.
2:00 PM-The co counsel takes over after the prayer of respondent 2.
2:03 PM- The co counsel seems to be struggling from questions from judges, the answer of respondent 1 does not seem to impress the judges. But she does not seem to back down. She cling back to the track.
2:05 PM- The rebuttal has begun and teams are cross questioning to each other and judges look impressed with the teams.
2:06 PM- Pleadings are over now.
COURT ROOM NO. 3A
1:05 PM- Pleadings begin !
1:10 PM- Respondent 1 is finding difficulty in answering questions asked by judges.
1:13 PM- Judges told respondent 1 to slow down and not to plead in hurry.
1: 15 PM- Judges question about refugees under U.N convention to which the respondent is having no answer.
1:21 PM- Respondent seeks his prayer.
1:22 PM-TIME OVER
Respondent 2 has started her pleading. and is quite confident. Judges compliment speaker 2 for her speaking skills.
1:26 PM-Judge come up with another question related to Climate Change and its principles to which respondent respond confidently.
1.34 PM– She begins with prayer.
1:41 PM– Petitioner Speaker 1 begins with facts and issues.
1:44 PM– Judges are asking questions on principles of charge of factory case. Speaker faces difficulty in answering them.
1:56 PM-Speaker 2 has begin with her pleadings.
1:58 PM- Speaker is finding difficulty in explaining facts to judges and is continuously rearranging and turning pages.
FIVE MINUTES LEFT
2:07 PM-A series of questions on Environmental refugees were asked by judges to which speaker responded confidently.
2:11 PM- Speaker begins with her prayer.
2:18 PM-TIME OVER.
2:19 PM- Rebuttal begins.
2:24 PM-Judges ask teams to step out of room.
PLEADINGS OVER !
COURT ROOM NO. 3B
12:51 PM– both the team and court masters present in the courtroom and also the judges.
1:05 PM- petitioner started her pleading.
1:07 PM- speaker 1 delivering her arguments now.
1:10 PM- judges started asking question and speaker 1 of petitioner side answering the questions confidentiality.
1:15 PM- judges regularly asking questions to the speaker 1 of petitioner side.
1:21 PM- speaker 1 of petitioner side over her pleading speaker 2 started her pleading.
1:26 PM– judges start asking questions to speaker 2 of petitioner side and she is very confidently answering the questions.
1:32 PM- As Petitioner no.2 has quoted a case, the judges asks the petitioner if the case is sufficient to have its effect on the whole issue .
But the petitioner finds it difficult to counter the question.
1:37 PM– time is over for petitioner side and respondent 1 is starting the pleading.
1:38 PM– Respondent 1 proceeds with the pleading
1:39 PM– Respondent 1 proceeds with the pleading by pin pointing refugee issue …
1:45 PM– Respondent 1 refers to article 1 clause A for the refugee issue
1:50 PM– As the judges ask about the jurisdiction of refugees, the latter counters the question by explaining article 34.
1:55 PM– Respondent no.2 proceeds with the pleading
1:58 PM– Respondent no.2 ties a quick briefing on article 14
2:00 PM– The court asks respondent no.2 a question but the latter is unable to counter the same
2:06 PM– Respondent no.2 starts to give a briefing on article 44 and article 45
2:10 PM– respondent no.2 is startled with the questions proposed by the court and is given a few minutes in grace as the given time is over to him.
2:15 PM– The court endorses the score sheet to the court masters.
COURT ROOM NO. 3C
1:04 PM– Both the teams and the judges have arrived in the court room.
petitioner speaker 1
seeks permission to approach the dais and is granted for the same!
1:05 PM– Petitioner reaches the dais.
1:10 PM– It is almost 10 Minutes and judges have yet not asked a single question whereas the petitioner is talking about ARTICLE 36
1:15 PM– Judges finally throw their first question and the petitioner is confident!
Judges are continuously roasting her but she is confident enough to answer every question asked by them.
1:17 PM– Petitioner continues to talk about article 13.
1:20 PM– Judges throw a question asking her about the difference between refugees and aliens whereas the petitioner calmly and confidently answers the question.
1:21 PM– Petitioner talks about domestic violence which was faced by the victim and judges are keenly involved in the conversation with her.
1:23 PM– Times up!
The petitioner concluded her arguments as best as she could.
petitioner speaker 2
Seeks permission to approach the dais and is granted the same!
1:25 PM– Petitioner reaches the dais.
1:27 PM– Judges ask her about UNG which was confidently as well as correctly answered by the petitioner.
1:29 PM– Petitioner is confidently answering the question and presenting her views on the argument.
1:31 PM– Judges are playing with the words and she is gradually falling into the trap! Petitioner is numb now!
1:34 PM– Judges ask her the simple difference between treaty law and customary law which was confidently answered by the petitioner.
1:36 PM– Petitioner is now trying to prove the respondent’s fact void.
1:39 PM- Petitioner speaker 2 concludes and seeks for pray
COURT ROOM NO. 4A
1:05 PM- Petitioner speaker 1 begins pleading
1:18 PM– judges have started grilling the speaker with questions and seems to be convinced with the answer.
1:21 PM– Begins pleading by answering the questions of judges
1:23 PM– Speaker look quite nervous.
1:26 PM– Speaker 1 trying to convince the judges with the answers.
1:35 PM– Respondent speaker 1 (Sr 08) begins pleading confidently
1:40 PM– TEN MINUTES LEFT
1:42 PM– judges seemed to be convinced with the pleading and so respondent speaker 2 carry on further
1:45 PM– TWO MINUTES LEFT
1:46 PM– Judges ask questions and respondent didn’t get the question.
1:47 PM– done pleading.
RESPONDENT SPEAKER 2
1:47 PM– begins pleading.
1:52 PM- Judges ask questions.
TEN MINUTES LEFT
Judges seemed unconvinced with the answer.
1:56 PM– Judges try to confuse the speaker.
1:59 PM- Done with the pleading.
2:30 PM- After the preliminary round 1, teams moved for the lunch break.
3:00 PM- Teams are now feeling energetic after the lunch and proceed towards the respective court rooms.
PRELIMINARY ROUND 2:
COURT ROOM NO. 1A
3:50 PM- The pleadings begins.
3:59 PM- Speaker 1 continues to establish the facts before the jury very confidently.
4:01 PM- The 1st speaker describes the facts covering areas like the refugee law.Also citing the powers of ICJ.
4:03 PM-The Jury by asking some key questions tries to trap the petitioner speaker but she smoothly escapes it with relevant facts.
5 MINUTES LEFT.
4:05 PM- Speaker continues to present the facts, evidences and articles to support her arguments before the jury. Judges are quite impressed.
4:14 PM- The petitioner sums up.
4:17 PM- The speaker 2 starts pleading in the dais. The 2nd speaker handles the rest part of the case in the best way .
4:21 PM- Sticking on to the point the co counsel continues pleading, without forgetting to beautify the points said by the counsel of the same side.
4:26 PM- The Jury raises questions and the speaker 2 confidentially answers to them.
4:32 PM-The judges request the speaker to sum up as the time has ended.
4:33 PM- Respondent speaker 1 approaches the dais.
4:41 PM-The Respondent side objects the acts done by the petitioner. In a medium tone she continues to stick on to the facts of the case.
TEN MINUTES LEFT.
4:43 PM- Speaker 1 describes about the climate refugees in the courtroom.
FIVE MINUTES LEFT.
4:50 PM-Speaker continues to talk about the migrants who were forced to leave their home due to sudden or long term changes in their local environment.
4:53 PM-The co-counsel from the Respondent side comes up to the dais and starts the submissions.
4:57 PM- Citing some articles from the moot proposition, the speaker 2 continues to plead.
4:59 PM– In an another submission the speaker also mentioned some aspects of the Narcotics drugs and psychotropic substances act (NDPS).
FIVE MINUTES LEFT
5:07 PM- Speaker 2 concludes.
5:09 PM– REBUTTAL begins.
5:11 PM- The Respondent speaker also stands firmly with her arguments made in the early minutes. She concludes.
5:12 PM-The pleadings are over.
COURT ROOM NO. 1B
3:43 PM – The Petitioner and respondent have arrived. The participants welcomed each other. And they are waiting for the judges’ arrival.
3:55 PM – The judges have arrived and the pleadings have begun. The Petitioner side councilor 1 has started her pleadings and started off by stating the brief facts of the case.
4:02 PM– The judges are patiently listening to the legal arguments being presented by the councilor 1.
4:10 PM– The councilor is very confident and very clear with the facts and aware of laws. The judges are very impressed by her pleadings and they didn’t even question. And she seeks the permission to wrap up her arguments.
4:15 PM– The councilor 2 from Petitioner side seeks the permission and started with the final issue.
4:20 PM – The court has started questioning now. The judges are hearing the arguments being presented by the councilor 2 .
4:25 PM – 5 more mins but she is presenting herself without getting tensed.
4:30 PM-Time’s up that was the smoothest flow of arguments from both the councilors .
4:31 PM -Now its turn for the Respondent side . Councilor seeks the permission and begun his pleading.
4:40 PM– He began his arguments in a poised and calm manner. The judges kept listening to him.
4:45 PM -Now the councilor came up with some of the relevant cases to support his arguments.
4:50 PM– Councilor 2 has started the pleadings.
4:57 PM-The councilor is supporting her arguments with environmental law and globalization.
5:00 PM– One of the judges raised a question and the councilor is struggling to convince the judges.
5:02 PM – The councilor has stated about the domestic violence .
5:05 PM– Councilor concluded the arguments in the allotted time and seeks for the prayer.
5:06 PM– The rebuttal has begun.
5:10 PM – The judges are impressed by both the sides. Now the judges are in discussion each other.
5:15 PM– The score sheets were handed over to the court masters and the session is over.
COURT ROOM NO. 1C
3:53 PM-Judges have arrived and the pleadings are about to begin.
3:55 PM-The court is in session and the petitioner have started pleading. The judges asks the petitioner about nationalism and the petitioner is answering their questions very confidently
4:00 PM– The petitioner talk about the ICJ.
4:06 PM– Judges asked that What are the disputes related to the state?The petitioner answered this question accurately.
4:17 PM– Time’s up.
4:20 PM– Speaker no.2 of the petitioner approaches the dais and begin with his pleadings.
4:22 PM– The judges asks questions about customary international law. The speaker seems to be confused by the questions asked by the judges.
4:30 PM– The petitioner concludes and seeks for prayer.
4:31 PM– Respondent no.1 approaches the dais.
4:32 PM-The judges are testing his wit but the respondent is too clever to give all the answer asked by the judge.
TEN MINUTES LEFT.
4:37 PM-The respondents defines Article 38 of ICJ in detail.
4:43 PM-Two minutes are left and the judges are continuously asking questions to the respondent. The respondent looks confused for a moment but she is able to give all the answers asked by the judges.
4:45 PM– Speaker 2 of the respondents approaches the dais.!
4:48 PM-The respondent talks about the water crisis and has a good speaking skill.
4:58 PM-The time is about to get over and the judges continue to ask questions to the respondent.
5:02 PM– Petitioner no. 1 now continues to rebuttal and seems very confident.
5:05 PM– All the pleadings have ended.
COURT ROOM NO. 2A
3:44 PM -Both the teams and court masters have taken seats.
3:50 PM– Judges have arrived and the court is in session . Petitioner no. 1 started pleading .
3:52 PM – Judges started asking questions about the jurisdiction . Judges continue asking questions about ICJ.
3:55 PM– Petitioner no. 1 doesn’t seem confident and judges and are not satisfied with the answers from petitioner no. 1.
3:57 PM-TEN MINUTES LEFT.
4:00 PM-Judges ask questions about the disputes and remedies .Petitioner no. 1’s
Answer satisfied the judges .
4:03 PM– Judges ask questions about the issue of expropriation and are satisfied the answer given by the petitioner no. 1.
4:05 PM– Two minutes left .
4:06 PM-Petitioner no. 1 has submitted her issue and petitioner no. 2 has taken over .
4:08 PM-Petitioner no. 2 explains the term refugee to the judges.
4:10 PM– Judges started asking questions about the refugee laws mentioned .
4:11 PM-Ten minutes left .
4:12 PM– Judges asked questions and petitioner no. 2 confidently answered them.
4:16 PM– Five minutes left .
4:18 PM– Petitioner no. 2 is speaking confidently.
Judges asked about best eminent threat about the disaster.
Petitioner no. 2 doesn’t seem to answer confidently.
4:20 PM-Judges started asking questions and petitioner no. 2 is unable to answer .
4:21 PM– Time is over but the petitioner no. 2 still hasn’t finished her pleading.
4:22 PM-Extra time given by judges to petitioner no. 2 to answer their questions but the judges are not satisfied with the answers.
4:25 PM-Respondent no. 1 started pleading . He seems very confident and has good speaking skills .
4:27 PM– Judges asked questions about arbitratory tribunal mentioned by respondent no. 1 and judges seem satisfied with answer.
4:29 PM– Respondent no. 1 has built a very good argument. He is backing up his every argument with legal reasoning.
4:32 PM-Judges asked questions on humanitarian issue and Respondent no. 1 is able to give satisfying answer.
4:35 PM-Five minutes left .
4:38 PM -Respondent no. 1 explains about environmental conditions of the nation and explain that the state cannot be sole judge for it .
Two minutes left .
4:40 PM– Time over .
The judges gave extra time to the speaker to conclude his argument. It looks like the judges are really impressed by his ability to argue and research.
4:42 PM– Respondent no. 2 started pleading.
4:45 PM– Respondent no. 2 speaks confidently and judges seem impressed.
4:47 PM– Respondent no. 2 seems lost and is unable to find the relevant legal reasoning to support her argument.
4:50 PM-Judges asked questions based on the facts and speaker no. 2 seems to answer every question to satisfy the judges .
4:54 PM– The respondent sums up but the judges do not seem satisfied.
4:55 PM– Petitioner no. 1 started the rebuttal but she doesn’t seem confident .
5:00 PM-Time over.
And she concluded her rebuttal.
5:01 PM– Respondent no. 1 started the rebuttal.
5:03 PM-Judges asked about the international treaties but the speaker answers about them confidently.
5:06 PM-Time is over but the judges gave him extra time.
Respondent no.1 submits his rebuttal and judges seem satisfied.
5:15 PM– Judges are giving their reviews and now the court is dismissed.
COURT ROOM NO. 2B
3:48 PM: The Petitioner and the respondent have arrived.The court masters are seated and are eagerly waiting for the judges.
3:55 PM– The judges have arrived.
3:58 PM – The court is in session.
3:59 PM– The Petitioner started pleading according to the procedure.
4:06 PM-The judges are asking questions in context with ICJ , treaty law and customary international law.
4:10 PM – The council seems to be struggling with the question which was thrown at her,but she seems to have answered most of the them.
4:13 PM -Petitioner council 1 seems to be struggling against the questions raised by the Judge .
4:16 PM– The court Master rang the bell to indicate that the time is up.
4:17 PM– The co council of the Petitioner is pleading now. She asks for another 30 minutes and is granted the same. She seems to pick up the pace .
4:23 PM– The council is now answering most of the question which are asked by the judges.
4:25 PM-The questions became more and more intriguing dilly-dally .The judges seemed to be satisfied with the answer of the council.
4:32 PM– The court master rang the bell saying the time is over,the council asks for 2 minutes and was granted.
4:34 PM– The council concluded her arguments.
4:35 PM -The respondent started pleading.
4:37 PM – The questions were Majorly based on Article 32 and 34 (2) of statue of laws of justice,diplomatic protection.
4:45 PM– The council 1 of the respondent did not seems to be in trouble with the issue 1 but with issue 2 the judges started questioning which was hard for the council to answer .
4:49 PM – The court master shows the sign for 5 minutes. The council became more aware of the time and continued the pleading.
4:54 PM– Respondent council 1 concluded the pleading and council 2 took over the pleadings and continued with the issues of the case.
5:01 PM– The council 2 of the respondent is a very confident and the judges seems to be impressed by her ability to argue .
5:04 PM – The judges are asking questions and the council is answering them very well.
5:07 PM– The rebuttal has started .The council 1 of the Petitioner has raised the issue regarding article 38 and nationalism .The counselor concluded her arguments and seeks prayer.
5:13 PM– The council 1 of the respondent has given the statements. The council concluded her arguments and seeks prayer.
The judges were impressed by both the teams.
5:18 PM -Judges are giving reviews to both the teams.
5:20 PM– The session has ended.
COURT ROOM NO. 3A
3:53 PM– Judges have arrived and proceedings have started .
3:55 PM– Petitioner no.1 has started pleading .
3:56 PM– Petitioner is interrupted by Judge for proper explanation.
3:58 PM– Petitioner 1 was asked a series of logical questions which she is handling quite confidently and she was instructed to proceed further.
4:01 PM-Petitioner was finding it difficult to answer the questions in ENGLISH so she was permitted to Answer them in Hindi by the judge.
4:31 PM– Judges were impressed by her pleading as she has answered all the questions accurately and properly not even a single mistake is made by her , judges seems quite happy by her performance .
4:36 PM– Respondent 2 has started pleading .
4:37 PM– Respondent 2 is also very confident and has good English speaking skills , judges were impressed by this team as both the respondent are very logical in answering all the questions rather than looking and rearranging pages .
4:40 PM-Judges are finding it difficult to put questions As respondent 2 is so accurately explaining facts and issues , she is explaining each and everything properly without even referring to files, judges complimented her for her self confidence .
4:44 PM– Finally the judges asked a question about migrant purpose but again the respondent Handel it with confidence and passes a file sheet to the judges.
4:50 PM– Respondent 2 seeks her prayer.
4:53 PM– Petitioner 1 begins with rebuttal but was interrupted by judges as that rebuttal was already clarified by her.
4:54 PM– Judges ask teams to step out and the proceedings comes to end .
COURT ROOM NO. 3B
3:53 PM– Judges have arrived and the proceeding is about to start.
3:55 PM– Petitioner 1 proceeds for the pleading and defines article 31.
3:58 PM– The court again starts with the questions and the petitioner is confident to answer the same.
4:02 PM– As the petitioner pin points ICJ in his pleading the court starts to question her for the same and she is able to answer the questions confidently.
4:07 PM– The time is over for petitioner 1 but the latter is allowed extra time in order to complete her pleading .
4:21 PM– Petitioner 2 approaches the dais to start the proceeding
4:25 PM– The questions proposed by the court to petitioner no.2. Creates a dilema for the latter and he is nervous to answer the same.
4:34 PM– Petitioner no.2 concludes the argument.
4:46 PM– Respondent no.1 starts with the proceedings.
4:49 PM– Respondent no.1 gives a brief speech on article 36 of ICJ.
4:52 PM– As the court asks questions from respondent no.1 and she is confident to give all the answers.
5:12 PM– respondent 2 started her pleading and in the 1st minute judges starts asking questions.
5:15 PM– Respondent 2 gives answer to the question nicely.
5:20 PM– now the pleadings are over and judges are calculating the score sheet.
COURT ROOM NO. 3C
3:50 PM-The Participants wait in anticipation for the second round of Prelims to start…
3:54 PM-Pleading begins!
3:55 PM – Petitioner reaches the dais.
4:00 PM– The first counsel from the petitioner’s side has a good command over her arguments. She seems to be in control of the situation from the start. The Judges and the respondents are completely in tune with her arguments.
4:05 PM-Arguments of the petitioners seem to be structured in a persuasive manner. The judges then interject with a series of questions. The counsel tries to reply to these questions confidently. The judges seem to have caught the petitioners off guard.
4:08 PM– Petitioner continue talking about article 14.
4:10 PM– Petitioner speaker 2 reaches the dais.
4:20 PM– It has been 10 mins and judges have not raised a single question.
4:22 PM– Petitioner speaks confidentially.
4:25 PM– Times up! judges did not ask even a single question and the argument is over .Petitioner seeks for prayer.
4:55 PM-Respondent speaker 2 concludes and seeks for prayer.
4:59 PM – Counsel on the behalf of the respondent’s side begins with rebuttal. Judges do not ask any questions but do not seems to be Convenced by the argument.
5:01 PM – Pleadings over.
5:01 PM – Judges are filling the score sheet. Score sheet are sealed.
COURT ROOM NO. 4A
3:56 PM– speaker begins with pleading.
4:06 PM– FIVE MINUTES LEFT.
4:07 PM– Speaker seems confused with question asked by the judge.but trying to convince them and doing best to answer.
4:09 PM– TWO MINUTES LEFT.
4:09 PM– Speaker is in doubt with the question asked by the judge.
4:10 PM– TIME OVER.
4:12 PM– Speaker is unable to answer the questions raised by the judges and couldn’t proceed further because of lack of time.
PETITIONER SPEAKER 2
4:13 PM– Begins pleading confidently.
4:15 PM– Judge ask the question about difference between climate change and weather change. Speaker answer that question confidently.
4:18 PM– TEN MINUTES LEFT.
4:23 PM– FIVE MINUTES LEFT……Questions raised by the judges, make it difficult for the speaker to answer them. Judges seemed unconvinced with the answer.
4:26 PM– TWO MINUTES LEFT.
4:28 PM– Petitioner speaker 2 done with the pleading.
RESPONDENT SPEAKER 1
4:28 PM– Speaker Begin with pleading.
4:31 PM– Judges now begin asking questions. Speaker answer the question confidently but judges seemed to be unconvinced.
Speaker is getting confused with the flurry questions of the judges .Speaker now is correcting her statement.
4:34 PM-TEN MINUTES LEFT.
4:36 PM– Speaker is now contradicting her statement with the question asked by the judge .
4:39 PM– FIVE MINUTES LEFT.
4:42 PM– TWO MINUTES LEFT.
4:44 PM-TIME OVER.
4:46 PM– Speaker is taking time to conclude her pleading and “TIME OVER” sign was show by the court master thrice.
4:50 PM– Speaker done with the pleading.
RESPONDENT SPEAKER 2
4:51 PM– Begins with the pleading seemed to be confident about her pleading.
4:53 PM– Judges begin asking questions and were impressed by the answer.
4:56 PM– TEN MINUTES LEFT.
5:01 PM– FIVE MINUTES LEFT.
5:03 PM– Speaker done with her pleading.
6:35 PM– SO HERE IS THE RESULT FOR WHICH WE WERE WAITING: TEAMS QUALIFIED FOR THE QUARTER FINAL
7:30 PM– Teams which qualified for the SEMI FINALS are:
CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL TEAMS FROM LLOYD FAMILY.
7:33 PM– So we the blogging team keeps you update with the event, Good Night.!
DAY 3 (17 FEBRUARY 2019)
9:20 AM– The final day is here. Participants have pulled up their socks and are pumped for the Semi final round . Every body is going to give it their all to make it to the finals and be declared as the ultimate winner of the competition.
9:25 AM– The teams have arrived.
9:30 AM– The teams that qualified for the semi finals have arrived in the court rooms.
COURT ROOM NO. 2A
9:44 AM-Team have arrived in the court room.
9:49 AM-Judges have arrived in the court room.
9:53 AM-Petitioner Speaker 1 begins with the pleading
9:54 AM-Speaker starts by addressing article 36 (1) which talks about the construction of dam that had caused environmental problems and also refers to Articles 38 and talks about General principles of law as the speaker put an emphasis on Article 36 then the speaker move towards the 2nd issue that is reputation of migrants.
10:01 AM– Talking about Article 38 (1B) the speaker raises questions on state explaining how they should act on this issue,
10:04 AM-Judges began asking questions.
10:05 AM-5 minutes left.!
Moving towards the third issue that is refugee convention. In this issue there was cross of refugees which led a effect on climate then the speaker talks about environmental refugees (livelihood, threat to life).
10:11 AM-Speaker talks about nationality ,Way of life ,Claim related to displacement visa that were expired.
Done with pleading.
10:33 AM– Respondent Speaker 1 begins,Introduces the issue maintainability , deported people ,basic rights, nationalization.
10:35 AM– Starts with 1st issue referring to article 36 court doesn’t have the jurisdiction.
10:37 AM-The speaker talks general principles of law and the judges asked the question that charter can be consider as treaty can it be referred and what is repulsion?
10:46 AM– can the state party resolve the dispute without going to the court? The speaker answer the question stating that yes they can resolve if they refers to ICJ.
Respondent speaker 2
10:52 AM– speaker speaks in favor of why the refugees is illegal migrants not a refugee and therefore shouldn’t be deported to kindgom of MWF.
10:56 AM– Also talks about the executive order in which the visa was expired and deportation of the victim and her kids to their home town and victim never approached to the supreme court and that’s why should be deported back to her country and also victim have fundamental right to protect her and her dignity under domestic laws.
11:06 AM– Speaker also refers to the monetary laws
Petitioner speaker 2
11:11 AM– Speaker refers to article 38 and general principles of law and UN charter and UNHCR have been taken into consideration and Article 36 cant be taken into consideration.
Respondent speaker 1
11:20 AM– It summarize all the points and argument of necessity and negative and positive obligation which are here to protect fundamental right.
pleadings are over.
COURT ROOM NO. 2B
9:49 AM– Teams are present and the judges have arrived.
9:51 AM-The speaker 1 from the petitioner side approaches the dais. Getting ready to begin with her pleadings in this beautiful morning session.
9:53 AM-Speaker starts to present the facts , as she continues the jury asks her the 1st question which was answered by the help of her counsel.
10:00 AM-No questions raised by the jury and the speaker continues with her pleadings.
10:01 AM– The Speaker tells about the climate change and also it’s consequences.
The Speaker talks about many national and international conventions that mainly deal with these climatic changes.
10:06 AM-The Speaker supports her arguments with some articles and judges seems to be convinced with this. She continues with her next submission.
10:08 AM– Jury allow speaker to speak for extra time. The Speaker draws the jury’s attention to her last submission.Completely sticking on to the facts she continues…
10:11 AM-The co-counsel with the permission of the jury approaches the dais on behalf of the petitioner side.
10:13 AM-The Speaker will be dealing with two of her submissions. The Speaker 2 talks about the ‘Refugee’, some international rights from the UDHR,ICCPR,ICSCR.
10:19 AM-The Speaker 1 can be seen passing the compendium to the court masters which is then handed over to the judges to support the statements of speaker 2.
10:26 AM-Time over!Judges allows the Speaker to continue.
10:31 AM-The Respondent representative comes to the dais.
10:33 AM– The jury continuously asks some set of questions to the speaker , she answers to them confidentally.
10:37 AM-The Speaker describes the article 30 and 32 of ICJ. The Speaker beautifully finishes her submission and moves on to her next submission.
10:44 AM– She explains about the issues which fall under the ambit of climate change.
10:46 AM-Time over. Extra time allowed.
10:47 AM-The Speaker concludes her part and says that the arguments made by the petitioners were ‘baseless’.
10:48 AM-The 2nd speaker from Respondent side starts her pleading.
10:51 AM-The Speaker continues with her pleading covering the areas of territorial jurisdiction.
10:56 AM-The representative also speaks about UN’s way of dealing with these issues happening between countries.
11:01 AM– REBUTTAL BEGINS.
Looks like the petitioner speaker have noted down their answers while the Respondent was alleging them. Petitioner speaker stick to her submissions and concludes.
11:03 AM-The Respondent speaker 1 comes up with her final pleading , she also adds the meaning of state as defined by John Locke.
11:06 AM-PLEADINGS OVER. Teams have left the courtroom. Judges fill up the score sheet.
11:08 AM– Judges hand over the score sheets to the court masters.
11:12 AM-Teams are again called inside the courtroom.
The judges remarks that a voice modulation was needed for both of the teams.The jury happily shares the experience adjudicating this case.
11:19 AM-Judges leave the courtroom.
11:30 AM– With this semi final is over and the we eagerly wait for the result.
12:00 PM– The result has been declared and the respective teams for the finals are : SR-014 V. SR-03
MOOT COURT HALL 1
12:20 PM– Teams have arrived in the moot court hall 1.
12:22 PM– Judges have arrived in the moot court hall.
12:25 PM-The petitioner speaker starts her pleading, she seems to be quite prepared as she is framing her arguments very rationally.
12:28 PM-With full enthusiasm she continues pleading citing all the facts regarding the case.
The Speaker also mentions the article 30 of the ICJ.
12:29 PM-One of the jury demanded a copy of evidence for all the other judges to which the petitioner replied that they have only one copy in their hand.
12:31 PM-The petitioner speaker seems to be well aware of the time allotted to her. She continues to plead fluently.
12:32 PM-The bench raised a question regarding the principle of jurisdiction to which the petitioner eventually gave a satisfying answer.
12:35 PM– The issues regarding customary law were read with ICCPR,ICSCR and other relevant articles.
12:37 PM-The issues which falls under the ambit of customary international law are also being cited by the petitioner speaker.
12:39 PM-The bench is on and on grilling the petitioner with their questions.
12:40 PM– TWO MINUTES LEFT.
12:41 PM-The Speaker wraps up her argument successfully.
12:43 PM-The co counsel from the petitioner side approaches the dais and starts speaking in fast and confident manner.
12:46 PM-The bench pose a question on reference to the case that ‘ where in the facts do the speaker come across the word ‘persecution’.
12:49 PM– As per the bench the speaker 2 from petitioner side is not clear with her arguments. She contradicts her own arguments.
12:53 PM-The judges raised a question whether law is a vehicle to ‘prosecution or else the law itself is a prosecution to which the speaker responds successfully.
12:57 PM– TWO MINUTES LEFT.
12:58 PM-The jury points out some important question which got the speaker tongue-tied for a second.
12:59 PM-Time over. The Speaker requests the bench to grant her one more minute to conclude her argument. The judges grant her 15 seconds , the speaker sums up her argument promptly.
1:09 PM-The Speaker from the Respondent side approaches the dais,with a good tone starts her submissions.
1:12 PM-The Speaker mentions article 36,40 of the ICJ statutes.
1:15 PM-The Speaker is still fielding the arguments. The judges are listening to her issues without putting on questions to her.
1:17 PM-FIVE MINUTES LEFT.
1:20 PM-The Speaker is still presenting her arguments as the judges are cross questioning her , the bench made the speaker quite confused with their questions.
1:23 PM-The Speaker concludes her part of the submissions.
Respondent Speaker 2:
1:28 PM-The co counsel takes over the dais and starts describing the facts of the arguments.
1:36 PM-The Speaker continues to explain the facts of the case while there is no question raised by the Jury.
1:39 PM-TWO MINUTES LEFT.
1:40 PM-The Respondent counsel requests the jury to find out a suitable solution regarding the case.
1:41 PM-REBUTTAL BEGINS.
1:45 PM-The Respondent speaker wraps up her argument by borrowing some lines from the English philosopher John Locke regarding the meaning of state.
1:47 PM-TIME OVER
1:50 PM-The judges have left the courtroom.
2:00 PM– All the participants along the volunteers and other members present in the college are moving forward for their lunch.
2:45 PM– All the participants have assembled in the seminar hall for the valedictory session.
3:05 PM– All are looking pretty and are waiting for the Valedictory Session to begin.
3:15 PM– All the participants are looking super excited for the ceremony to begin, a couple of them are bit nervous about the result.
3:20 PM– The Chief Guests and other dignitaries have arrived and are welcomed by President , Director and Deputy Director of Lloyd Law College.
3:31 PM-The valedictory function of 4th Prof N R Madhava Menon SAARC MOOT COMPETITION has begun.
3:40 PM– President Mr. Manohar Thairani is addressing the audience . In his speech he is thanking each judge for attending and being a part of SAARCLAW mooting competition.
3:53 PM– Prof Menon is addressing the gathering .He talks about the importance of the SAARC law mooting competitions,the importance of 5 different countries gathering together and competing against each other .
4:05 PM– Prof . (Dr) S. Sivakumar , SAARCLAW mooting administrator is now delivering his speech. There is a zealous aura in the room as all the participants are keenly waiting for the results.
4:15 PM– Mrs. Anju Jain, Advocate, High court of Delhi is addressing the gathering with dedication to help the children understand the importance between a mission and a vision.
She explain the importance of mooting and the importance of people gathering in one place to exchange ideas and exchanging knowledge among each other.
4:20 PM– Mr Muhammed Mohsen Rashid, Secretary General , SAARCLAW is addressing the gathering.
4:27 PM– Mr justice Ajay Kumar Mittal, judge high court of Punjab and Haryana is delivering an impressive speech about the importance of SAARC mooting which would help in shaping the skills of the students. He said that the students who participated were very impressive and added that the judges were very impressed with the performance of the students in the final round.
4:45 PM– Dr. Justice Syed Refaat Ahmed , High Court division, Supreme court of Bangladesh is addressing the gathering.
5:15 PM- Hon’ble Ms. Justice Indira Banerjee (Judge,Supreme Court of India)
Addressing the gathering..She cites the evolution of teaching pedagogy in the field of Law .
She also shares some tips with the law students to succeed in this profession while she has already expressed her sincere apology for being late to this event in her starting speech.
5:45 PM- Hon’ble Ms. justice Indira Banerjee is wrapping up her speech by congratulating all the teams to participate in SAARCLAW mooting competition and experiencing a whole lot of new things in this competition.
5:48 PM- The judge remarks the gender disparity which is prevailing in the High Courts and Supreme Courts and urges the law students to maintain a balance of it. She also adds that each budding lawyers who came here for the competition will return with lots of memories and knowledge.!
5:52 PM- Felicitations and award giving ceremony starts.
6:20 PM- The result been declared is as follow:
Best Memorial :
3rd) SR 11 – University of Columbia
2nd) SR 07 – School of Law, Bhuvaneshwar
1st) SR 04 – Faculty of Law, BHU
Best Research Paper :
3rd) SR 09 – Faculty of Law, Dhaka
2nd) SR 06 – Govt. Law College, CNWA
1st) SR 14 – Nepal Law Campus
Best Male Advocate :
SR 04 – BHU
Best Female Advocate :
SR 14 – Nepal Law Campus
Runner Up :
SR 14 – Nepal Law Campus
SR 03 – Symbiosis, Noida
6:40 PM- The valedictory function ended with the National Anthem.
Fourth Professor N.R MADHAVA MENON SAARC LAW MOOTING COMPETITION is a flagship program organised by LLOYD LAW COLLEGE. This year it was organized from 15th to 17th February 2019. College volunteers participated enthusiastically for the lucrative conduction of the event. The delegates participated with tremendous energy. The students expressed their views about their learning and achievements at LLOYD LAW COLLEGE. All the respected dignitaries and guests who graced the occasion with their presence and appreciated the efforts of LLOYD LAW COLLEGE to make event as a grand success. After several rounds of clash between different teams. Team code SR-03 (SYMBIOSIS , NOIDA) was declared as the winner of the competition. LLOYD LAW COLLEGE congratulates all the winners of the competition.
LLOYD LAW COLLEGE extends our heartiest gratitude to all Judges, guests, participating teams and college volunteers who worked day and night to mark their event as a memorable competition in the history of Mooting.