The National Law University Odisha is pleased to welcome you to the live blogging of the Oral Rounds of 11th Bose & Mitra & Co. International Maritime Arbitration Moot (IMAM) 2024. This event is organized in collaboration with Bose & Mitra & Co. as Title Sponsor of the Moot, International Institute of Shipping and Trade Law, Swansea University as Academic Partner, Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution as Resource Partner, Lloyd’s List Intelligence as Knowledge Partner and SCC Online-EBC as Exclusive Media Partner.
Bose & Mitra & Co. is one of the oldest and largest steadfast law firms in the field of Maritime Law in India, with a client base worldwide. They have been ranked as a band 1 law firm by Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners in the field of shipping. In the recent past, they received an award for excellence in “Maritime Jurisprudence” from the Indian Corporate Counsel Association.
Institute of International Shipping and Trade Law (IISTL), Swansea University, dedicates specialist research and professional training centre within Swansea University’s School of Law. IISTL has gained a worldwide reputation for its contribution to research, policymaking, professional training and teaching in various areas of maritime law.
Informa Law (www.informa.com), via its online platform www.i-law.com delivers expert case reporting, commentary, and analysis across eight specialist areas of commercial practice. Informa’s industry expertise means it does not just provide the information: its analysis tells what it means for you, your clients, and your business. And connected content and powerful search functionality, gives the broad perspective you need when conducting legal research.
Asian Institute of Alternative Dispute Resolution (AIADR) is the first not-for-profit member-based Asian Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) forum. AIADR is endorsed by the Asian African Legal Consultative Organisation (AALCO) and was launched in April 2018 by His Excellency Prof. Dr. Kennedy Gastorn, the then Secretary-General of AALCO. AIADR is currently helmed by its president, Datuk Prof. Sundra Rajoo and is headquartered in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, with over 800 members and 40 jurisdictions.
The case study of this edition of IMAM has been drafted by Prof. Andrew Tettenborn, Chair in Law, LLM Shipping & Trade; Prof. Simon Baughen, Professor (Maritime Law), LLM Shipping & Trade; & Prof. Dr. George Leloudas, Professor, LLM Shipping & Trade; at IISTL, Swansea University, The United Kingdom.
We aim to ensure that you are fully engaged throughout this journey, where talented mooters will experience a rollercoaster of emotions including ecstasy, heartbreak, delight, shock, surprise, and unexpected twists, all condensed into a three-day event.
For keeping tabs on regular updates regarding IMAM, we encourage you to follow us on our Social Media Handles Instagram and LinkedIn for more regular insights. We wish the participating teams the very best of luck! May the odds be ever in your favor! For all the latest updates on the 11th NLUO Bose & Mitra Co. International Maritime Arbitration Moot, 2024 follow us on the SCC Online Blog:
Day 1 | 15th March 2024
PRELIMINARY ROUNDS
SESSION 1
Court Room 1 : Jebel v. Hamburg
12:06 It is a vibrant day today and the teams are slowly gathering in the courtroom. The air is abuzz with anticipation and enthusiasm.
12:22 As the questions are showered upon the speaker, they answer as many as they can, faltering a bit but surviving the grilling.
12:24 The bench is questioning the speaker, every chance they get. It is a hot bench today, no line put forth gets unnoticed and each claim is questioned.
12:27 The speaker, noticing the paucity of time, has requested for an extension which has been declined by an arbitrator.
12:30 The second speaker for the claimants is off to a great start.
12:35 The claimants put forth their points with confidence as the arbitrators listen intently.
12:36 The arbitrators ask the claimants for clarifications, as the claimant tries their best to answer all questions put forth by the bench.
12:41 The bench has no dearth of queries today, raining them upon the claimant. With two minutes left, the claimant speeds up and emphasises on their arguments.
12:45 The bench does not let up. They continue grilling the claimant as they ask for an extension to get enough time to satisfy all queries.
12:50 The respondents have entered the stage. They start off strong but are interrupted as the judges take a break.
12:54 And it begins again. The bench has started firing their questions as the respondent ponders and quickly responds to each question. The bench is not satisfied, asking clarifications on the answers given.
12:57 The respondent answers the queries asked and emphasize on their arguments by adding cases to bring strength to their claims.
13:00 With three minutes left, the arbitrator calls out fallacies in the arguement of the respondent by grilling them on their actions. The respondent explains their actions, in an attempt to defend the steps taken.
13:02 The Respondent falters as the bench asks for specific paragraphs for proof. Time’s up. The next speaker for the respondents and is off to a good start, listing out the issues briefly to aid his statements.
13:06 All was sailing smoothly when suddenly the arbitrator started with their queries. It is a hot bench indeed, perusing all facts put forth and not accepting any arguments without a plethora of clarifications.
13:13 The bench rains hard upon the respondent, granting a bit of respite by allowing the next argument to be put forth. And lo! It was a short lived respite.
13:20 The arbitrator does not seem convinced, pointing out all lapses. The respondent asks for an extension to be able to better put forth their case as the bench still looks dissatisfied.
13:23 The round ends as the rebuts and surrebuttals’ requirement are waived off by the bench thereby giving them an early relief from the rounds.
Court Room 2 : Busan v. Jeddah
12:12 Good morning everyone, we are all here in Cuttack waiting for the sessions to start. The sun shines bright as all the participants gather. The room is now in the presence of all the parties, we will be starting soon. The tension swims in the air.
12:24 The claimant starts strong but is interrupted by the arbitrator in the first minute itself, with heavy crossing questioning. Speaker 1 for the claimant eloquently lays down the facts pertaining to their side. The arbitrator poses a question that seems to throw the speaker off guard. The speaker fumbles with his answer but nonetheless is directed to proceed by the arbitrators.
12:26 Speaker 1 goes on to substantiate their case but again stops short for another round of questioning by the bench. The trick question posed by the bench forces speaker one to reframe their argument. There appears a nervous smile on Speaker one’s face, we suggest they keep their calm.
12:38 The grilling continues, and the bench again starts in full swing. There seems to be a mistake on the part of the claimant which is readily picked up by the bench. The claimant struggles to cover the spill, let’s see if the bench keeps them stuck in the loop or lets the claimant proceed.
12:43 Is the bench turning cold or just allowing the claimant to take a breather? With a confused laugh the bench asks the claimant to proceed.
12:51 The flow of arguments is ironically smooth from the bench. Is this the calm before the storm? Only time will tell. But alas, time is what they don’t have.
12:59 The bench stays true to its nature, the questions are direct and sharp nitpicking on every line said by the respondent. Both the bench and the respondent smile through the confusion, trying to understand the arguments being deliberated upon.
13:06 TIME’S UP!! The respondent has been granted an extension of a minute to summarise their points, but the arbitrator seems dissatisfied as they state that the respondent is not tracing their arguments digressing from the issue at hand.
13:08 Co-counsel for the respondent starts off with a bold declaration of the arguments that they will be dealing with in their time of speech, only time will tell if the bold attitude persists throughout their interactions with the bench.
13:15 The bench makes it clear that they are all ears listening to the respondent’s argument but the respondent should not assume that the benches shall agree with their agruments.
13:22 A the time runs out, a minute of extension is given by the bench, the respondent is asked to submit their prayer forward, and with that, the time comes a halt.
13:25 ITS REBUTTAL TIME! The claimant starts by posing a question to the respondent substantiating their case. With 2 minutes in hand, the paucity of time strikes with the claimant asking for an extension of 10 seconds. Oops! the claimant tripped while taking their seat back.
13:28 The respondents keep their rebuttal short but only scores will tell if they were sweet. Well-audience, spare me for my cheesy remarks BUT STAY TUNED for the next rounds.
Court Room 3 : Vancouver v. Rotterdam
13:02 Good morning everyone, finally the wait is over and both the teams have entered the courtroom the air is filled with nervousness and excitement as the teams gear up for the round to begin.
13:04 The participants are whispering among themselves going through their memos, their eyes gleaming with anticipation.
13:06 The round has commenced and with unwavering confidence the claimant explains the facts of the case making a compelling case.
13:15 The speaker leads the arbitrators through their arguments, pinpointing specific paragraphs to bolster their claims, laying a clear and sturdy groundwork for their case.
13:21 The bench is testing the mettle of the claimant asking them for clarification and testing the knowledge of the claimant regarding the maritime law.
13:24 The claimant has asked for an extension as time seems to be slipping out of their hands, will the claimant survive the grilling by the Arbitrators or will they succumb to the pressure ?
13:29 As the claimant meticulously structures their issues, attempting to sway the Arbitrators with compelling arguments, the judges’ expressions remain inscrutable, betraying no hint whether they are convinced or not.
13:33 The Arbitrator poses a fundamental question to the claimant, aiming to unsettle and test their resolve, however the claimant successfully manages to answer it.
13:38 Caught off guard by a technical question, the claimant falters, their confidence wavering like a flickering flame, will the claimant’s response be enough to sway the judges’ opinion?
13:40 The claimant have concluded their arguments and have returned to their seats. Have they navigated the maze of legal intricacies to claim victory? Only time will tell.
13:47 As soon as the respondent starts presenting their case, the judges interject asking for clarifications about their arguments. In an unexpected twist, the respondents inadvertently open a Pandora’s box of contradictions, offering the judges a prime opportunity to grill them on inconsistencies.
13.50 The bench relishes the opportunity to grill the respondents, throwing questions like arrows compelling the respondents to think on their feet.
14.10 The respondents seem to be short on time and have asked for extension which the arbitrators have granted only to keep grilling the respondents further, seems like it is a tough day for them today.
14.14 As the arbitrators linger on a pressing issue, the respondent finds themselves momentarily at a loss for a swift response, the arbitrators have asked for a case law from the respondent to support their argument.
14.16 The claimant launches into their rebuttal as the judges seize the opportunity to resume their questions. Like seasoned interrogators, they dissect each argument with relish, probing for weaknesses and contradictions.
14.20 As soon as the respondent begin their sur-rebuttal they are met with queries as the judges waste no time in resuming their relentless line of questioning, leaving the respondent with little room to maneuver as they struggle to assert their defence.
14.23 With the final echoes of argumentation fading into the air, the round concludes, leaving behind a sense of both relief and apprehension in its wake.
Court Room 4 : Santos v. Savannah
12:07 The Claimants have arrived on this lovely sunny day in Cuttack, looking enthusiastic for the first rounds of the 11th Bose and Mitra International Maritime Arbitration Moot, 2024!
12:19 The rounds for the first session will be commencing soon! We hope that it turns to be a promising round of arguments!
12:21 The rounds have begun and the arbitrators agree for a concise summary of the proposition.
12:26 The Arbitrator asks a question, answered with ease by the speaker. They cite past cases with expertise to strengthen their argument. This is met by the arbitrator’s questioning.
12:30 There are five minutes left for the claimant to make her compelling arguments. The arbitrators look for further clarfications, not entirely satisfied with the claims made.
12:35 The claimants need to wrap up her arguments quick, having one minute left of her time.
12:37 The second counsel for the claimants has taken the stage to lay out the issues and subsequent claims.
12:40 “Where in the facts is this mentioned?” The Arbitrator asks a question, stumping the Claimant for a moment.
12:49 The Claimant draws the attention of the arbitrators to more facts, as they has five minutes left. They lay out the losses their clients have faced and opens the floor to the arbitrators for clarifications. The Arbitrator looks pleased with the responses given by the claimant.
12:50 The counsel asks for an extension of time to continue their arguments. They make a preemptive argument of the respondents side to further break it down as the extension comes to a close.
12:26 The Arbitrator asks a question, answered with ease by the speaker. They cite past cases with expertise to strengthen their argument. This is met by the arbitrator’s questioning.
12:30 There are five minutes left for the claimant to make her compelling arguments. The arbitrators look for further clarfications, not entirely satisfied with the claims made.
12:35 The claimants need to wrap up her arguments quick, having one minute left of her time.
12:37 The second counsel for the claimants has taken the stage to lay out the issues and subsequent claims.
12:40 “Where in the facts is this mentioned?” The Arbitrator asks a question, stumping the Claimant for a moment.
12:49 The Claimant draws the attention of the arbitrators to more facts, as they has five minutes left. They lay out the losses their clients have faced and opens the floor to the arbitrators for clarifications. The Arbitrator looks pleased with the responses given by the claimant.
12:50 The counsel asks for an extension of time to continue their arguments. They make a preemptive argument of the respondents side to further break it down as the extension comes to a close.
12:54 The Respondents have started presenting their side of the facts and pointing out technicalities. This sets a strong counter to the claims made by the claimants.
12:59 The Arbitrator points out a contrary claim put forth by the respondent. This is handled with ease by the counsel, their point further driven by a case law. The exchange continues as the arbitrator comes up with a follow up question.
13:04 The Counsel proceeds to their second contention. The counsel, unable to finish her argument due to paucity of time, asks for a summary of arguments.
13:07 The arbitrator asks for clarification from the counsel. The counsel finishes her speech, which shall be followed by the second counsel of the respondent side.
13:22 The counsel lays emphasis on a case, already submitted by the claimants. However, they shift the case to support their client’s claims. The counsel also makes a hypothetical scenario in an attempt to strengthen their arguments.
13:25 The arbitrator brings up a further clarification as the counsel’s time comes to an end. The arbitrators do not allow the extension of time sought by the counsel.
13:27 The rebuttals have started! The claimant starts with great vigour to break down their opponents’ arguments.
13:30 The respondents are back on the floor, for the much-awaited sur-rebuttals.
13:32 The bench engages in a quick discussion amongst themselves, as the session ends.
Court Room 5 : Felixstowe v. Blair
12:12 It’s a sunny day in Cuttack, however this is the last concern for participants waiting for their rounds to begin. They look tensed, nevertheless the judges seems most jovial for incoming event.
12:21 The judge has come up with the first question for the counsel. The counsel, looking for the answer in the sheets, stuttering a bit to answer the same. The judge looks satisfied with the answer.
12:35 The grilling continues. The counsel refers to a judgment to content the judges’ queries, while the opposite party, chatting slowly among themselves looks the most attentive.
12:38 The counsel for the respondent party is here. The Arbitrators are asking for the facts once again. The bench asks for the prayer during the submissions, making the speaker fumble for a while. The bench is victorious in their move. The speaker continues to tussle.
12:51 Time’s Up! The second speaker looks confident and firm with her voice. A sense of boldness now fills up the courtroom. The bench demands second contention to be discussed first, trying to make the speaker nervous but they fail in their attempts as the speaker confidently proceeds with the second contention.
13:05 The claimant party is very attentive, noting down the points for the upcoming rebuttal rounds. There is no dearth of questions from the bench. The boldness of the respondent has hushed down as she answers the last question of her round. Time’s up!
13:17 The sur-rebuttal continues. Respondent demands a minute more as he goes forward with his justification. The bench seems most interested to tickle the party with their frequent queries.
13:20 The oral round is up now. The teams are leaving the courtroom now after a satisfying session.
Court Room 6 : Paradeep v. Chabahar
12:08 It is a warm day in Cuttack. Two judges have entered the courtroom and are discussing the nuances of maritime law amongst themselves. They wait for their third brother judge as he arrives shortly and wait for the participants.
12:15 The participants arrive and there is a certain air of nervousness in the courtroom. The CRMs initiate the formalities before the round begins.
12:29 The judge asks a question, and the speaker looks lost for words but composes himself in a minute and tries to answer the question. Unfortunately, the judges don’t buy the argument and start cross-questioning the nuances of the Compromis. And the first speaker is already down to 5 minutes to times up!
12:42 The counsel fumbles, and quickly recomposes herself to grab the attention of the judges with her arguments. The judge sarcastically exclaims about the interesting aspects of the arguments made.
12:51 2 minutes left, and the judges present interesting analogies to put across their question.
12:53 Times up! The judges ask the counsel one last question on the basics of contract law and grant an extension of 2 minutes. The counsel takes them through their compendium to answer the question and point to the exact paragraph in the judgement.
Court Room 7 : Vizag v. Bremen
12:30 The court room managers raise the placard that 5 minutes are left. The Speaker concludes his argument. He is then asked a question be the Arbitrator which deals with the technicalities of English Law.
12:49 “Are you sure?” The arbitrator asks the Claimant so as to ensure that he is confident. According to the Arbitrator, the Claimant was stating something contrary earlier. But the Claimant seems to have satisfied him by confidently giving a detailed explanation without showing any signs of nervousness.
13:04 Questions are being fired left, right and centre to which the Respondent looks to his teammates in a sigh of hope to satisfy the bench.
13:18 3 minutes left! But the Bench is oblivious to the fact as it continues to ask the Respondent a volley of questions which he strives hard to answer.
13:30 This oral round has concluded. The bench starts an internal discussion and carefully notes down the participants scores. The Arbitrator also suggests all the participants to speak a little louder and a bit more assertive.
Court Room 8 : Shenzhen v. Dalian
12:06 Greetings for the day Audience! The wait is finally over as Day 1 Session 1 of the 11th IMAM 2024 will be starting soon in NLUO, Cuttack, the city situated on the banks of the historic river Mahanadi. The Bench has taken their respective seats and are waiting for the counsels to arrive in the courtroom while taking an overview of the moot proposition.
12:14 The claimants and respondents have arrived in the courtroom. A mixed sense of both composure and curiousness prevails on their faces as they’re waiting for the battle to begin!
12:16 The claimant very calmly asks the bench’s permission to proceed to the dais. He proceeds to the dais and very smoothly but quickly starts with the role division and briefs the bench about the issues.
12:22 The most awaited part has begun! Bench has put some questions as soon as the counsel began with the issue. The counsel now, although a bit nervous is trying to recollect the arguments and retort to the bench.
12:28 With just 3 minutes left with counsel no. 1, he is trying to navigate through the questions thrown on him by the bench who seem in a mood to test the patience of the counsel. The respondents on the other side are revisiting their transcripts as they are able to feel the heat!
12:41 The saga of question & answer continues. The Bench is very keenly listening to the arguments of the counsel. The Bench concedes to the argument of the counsel asking for a case law to support it.
12:51 It’s time for the respondents. Counsel No. 1 of the respondents has approached the dais and starts with formal mapping of the presentation and jumps to Issue No.1.
12:54 The flow initiated by the counsel takes a halt as the Arbitrators decide to ask the question which every counsel fears, “Are you conceding to the claimant’s submission?” The counsel takes a pause, recollects his arguments and in a confident manner answers the questions raised.
13:05 The Counsel no. 2 for respondents has taken the dais. Sounds a bit mechanical in tone, still the bench seems to be following the submissions presented by the counsel.
13:09 A sudden curiousity came over the Bench as the Counsel used a legal maxim during the arguments. The Bench posed multiple questions but the counsel has seemingly convinced them.
13:20 An extension of 30 seconds has been granted by the bench to summarize the arguments of the respondents. We’re now heading towards the section of Rebuttals and surrebuttals. The Bench seems satisfied.
13:21 Claimants are all full with rebuttals as they take over the dais and start picking out the loopholes present in the respondent’s arguments. The Bench has been quiet over this.
13:25 A similar enthusiasm is seen from the respondent’s side as they start with the surrebuttals. Madam Arbitrator points out a confusion but the counsel manages to clear it out. Speaker No. 2 of claimant seems to be smirking during this.
13:28 The session has ended. Both the teams are visibly anxious while discussing with their teammates. The wait for the feedback is not helping the nervousness at all.
DAY 1 | 15TH MARCH 2024
PRELIMINARY ROUNDS – SESSION 1
CONCLUDES!
Day 1 | 15th March 2024
PRELIMINARY ROUNDS
SESSION 2
Court Room 1 : Colombo v. Busan
14:55 As we get ready to begin round 2, the arbitrators have taken their seats and are now reviewing the documents placed before them.
15:03 Both teams have arrived in the room and are making final preparations as they await the commencement of the round. The aura of the room is one of prolepsis.
15:15 The claimant has taken the floor and begun presenting their claim, and the arbitrators have requested a slight rearrangement of the podium to hear them better.
15:20 Just 2 minutes in, and the questions have already started flying! While the claimant has handled them well so far, the real test will be how they continue to persevere through? We’ll soon find out.
15:28 The arbitrators have requested clarification on one of the claims made, and the claimant appears somewhat flustered by the barrage of questions.
15:32 The courtroom managers have raised the “time’s up” stamp. The arbitrators, displaying kindness, have granted the claimant permission to conclude their argument.
15:35 As Speaker 2 assumes the floor, a commanding and self-assured voice fills the room. Barely a minute has passed before questions are being raised and clarifications being sought.
15:39 The arbitrators persist with a series of questions, delving into references from the literature. Speaker 2 is challenged to keep pace, striving to respond amidst the ongoing inquiry.
15:41 With just 5 minutes remaining, the tension in the room is palpable. Can the claimants sway the arbitrators in this fleeting time frame? The outcome hangs in the balance, awaiting the verdict of time itself.
15:46 As the clock strikes the deadline, time is officially up! The arbitrators graciously extend a minute for the claimant to finalize clarification on the last issue. In a final test of wit, a last question is posed. Will the speaker deliver a response that satisfies the discerning arbitrators?
15:51 The respondent’s counsel has commenced their arguments, allocating 16 minutes on the clock. They aim to address three key issues.
15:58 Questions regarding specific paragraphs are being thrown in the air, and the arbitrators are thoroughly grilling the counsel. Despite their attempts to answer confidently, the looming question is whether their responses will meet the arbitrators’ expectations.
16:02 With just 5 minutes left on the clock, the parade of questions shows no signs of relenting. However, the counsel remains composed, answering each query with conviction and pressing forward with their arguments.
16:05 Across the room, the claimants listen attentively to each argument, one subtly hinting to the other as if they have caught something in the respondent’s presentation that they could potentially exploit.
16:08 As the allotted time expires, the arbitrators grant a minute extension. Despite the ongoing grilling, the respondent makes final efforts to persuade the arbitrators to their perspective.
16:10 Respondent 2 steps up to the podium and launches into their arguments, aiming to bolster their position and sway the arbitrators further.
16:12 The arbitrators fire off the first question, but the respondent answers it without hesitation. However, this response prompts additional questions from the arbitrators.
16:17 As the “5 minutes remaining” stamp is shown, the respondent’s voice gains urgency. The room erupts once again with more questions directed at the respondent, adding to the tension of the moment. Ultimately satisfying them with their responses, the respondent moves ahead.
16:22 As the clock strikes its final chord, the respondent’s plea for an extension falls on deaf ears. Yet, just as the dust settles, a lone arbitrator raises one final question, breaking the respondent’s poise.
16:30 With the conclusion of arguments from both sides, the arbitrators requested the room be cleared to allow for a few minutes of final deliberation among themselves.
Court Room 2 : Klang v. Rotterdam
15:10 Good afternoon everyone! The courtroom looks energetic this post-break session. The judges have arrived, as have the respondents. The claimants seem to be relishing their lunch somewhere.
15:23 The claimants seem not to know what side of the room they are on! With the arrival of the original respondents, they move now to the “actual” claimants side; the session begins.
15:24 A tough start for the claimants! Before approaching the dais, they ask the arbitrator as to they would like to be addressed. To which the one of arbitrators sternly replies, “What do you think this is?”
15:27 The claimant is saved from this (basic) question by the disruption from the respondent’s researcher suddenly leaving the room. Now they have approached the dais and are giving their statement of facts.
15:32 The judges are confused and frustrated. The reason? The claimant’s inability to answer what a time charter agreement is.
15:34 The claimants inability to answer what seat and venue of arbitration is seems to baffle the arbitrator. The claimant has one minute of time left, and they move on their second issue.
15:37 Times up! The claimant is asked by the arbitrator to wrap up their argument in 10 seconds! And yet another question by the arbitrator, “what is a lien?”
15:40 The co-claimant arrives and moves to issue 3. Her audibility, or the lack thereof seems to frustrate the arbitrator.
15:42 A mooter’s nightmare! The arbitrator asks the claimant if she has actually done something, or if she’s just reading. The claimant replies that she has stage fright. The arbitrators encourage her to continue with the arguments.
15:45 The bar goes to a new low when the arbitrators ask the claimant to simply state the facts of the case. They start reading the facts, interrupted by the arbitrator to ask what they seek from this arbitration.
15:48 The respondents approach the bench and begin with their pleadings. They are listened to uninterrupted by the otherwise ‘not so calm’ bench.
15:53 The arbitrator strikes! There is a fast exchange of questions and answers. The respondent answers confidently, but the arbitrator seems unimpressed and continues the probe.
16:00 With 5 minutes left of the claimant’s time, the arbitrators keep the questions going. The respondent is discreetly trying to redirect the judges back to their issue.
16:02 With one minute left, the respondent reaches a blank, when the co-respondent comes to their rescue with a note that gets her back on track.
16:07 “Let me put you in my client’s shoes.” “No we don’t want to, please continue your argument.” The arbitrator jokes around with the respondent.
16:14 There seems to be a dispute of facts between the arbitrator and the respondent. It is a secret to all what brews at the bench, while two arbitrators talk among themselves, the third arbitrator accuses the respondent of taking advantage of the claimants!
16:21 It’s time for rebuttals! The claimants seem to be in no hurry. The claimant presents a question, the arbitrator answers for the respondents with a frustrated “they have already answered that”.
16:23 The respondent goes to make sur-rebuttals, but is showered with questions. “Keep your argument in your favour,” chips in the arbitrator.
16:30 Feedback begins! The arbitrator gave constructive criticism and praise to both the parties. With this, the session came to an end.
Court Room 3 : Mundra v. Santos
15:14 The lunch break comes to an end as the three judges, the claimants and the respondents are all well seated in the courtroom. The ambience is very inviting as the judges seem to have a pleasant chat.
15:17 Session commences as Speaker 1 from the Claimants side has begun with their speech. The arbitrators have already started with their questions and Speaker 1 tackles it wonderfully.
15:22 Speaker 1 continues with their speech and so do the arbitrators with their questions. The mood of the courtroom is tense as the arbitrators are interrogating the speaker ceaselessly.
15:28 The respondents appear to be paying close attention to each point and making important notes to be used later.
15:31 The arbitrators have posed a puzzling question which the speaker falters in answering. This marks the end of Speaker 1’s speech.
15:34 Speaker 2 starts with a steady pace and so do the arbitrators with their queries. Speaker 2 deals with the questions with great confidence.
15:37 The arbitrators have asked Speaker 2 to answer the question that their counterpart failed to answer. Speaker 2 retorts with the correct answer.
15:44 The arbitrators seem to get into the nitty-gritties of the statements being made by the speaker as they are delving into the fundamentals of the points being made. This concludes the claimants side of the speech.
15:47 Questions are being posed regarding the causes of action and the speaker falters to retort to them. This concludes the Claimants side of the speech.
15:53 Speaker 1 of the respondents side begins with the merits of their case and the arbitrators are ready with their questions regarding the clauses that are being mentioned.
15:55 Speaker 1 of the respondents side proceeds with their submission by adressing the claims made by the claimants. A portion of the speaker’s oral submissions appear to be unclear to the judges. The judges keep asking the speaker the same questions as they are not satisfied with the responses.
16:03 One of the arbitrators makes a witty remark about the speaker being overly persistent with referring to the claimant’s arguments instead of making their own points.
16:07 And the questions never stop! This hot bench of arbitrators seem to pick on every substance of the claims being made by the respondents. The speaker has been at par with their answers.
16:10 The arbitrators, who seem to be on a mission to puzzle the respondents with their theoretical questions, have found umpteen opportunities to grill this speaker as their answers don’t seem to satisfy the arbitrators.
16:14 The arbitrators seem to think that the speaker’s arguments are not backed by law or judgements and they have communicated the same to the speaker.
16:20 Time’s up for the speakers of the respondents side. Subsequently, the claimants side starts with their rebuttals in a highly modulated voice.
16:25 Time does not seem like a constraint in this courtroom as the arbitrators seem to be more focused on receiving clarifications in between the rebuttals provided by the claimants side.
16:29 The rebuttal for the respondents’ side ends with a slight hint of satisfaction on the faces of the arbitrators.
16:31 THE SUR-REBUTTAL STARTS! Stepping up, the respondent delivers the sur-rebuttals with confidence. They also succeed in answering the questions posed and manage to complete their sur-rebuttals on time.
16:35 THE ROUND COMES TO AN END! What a rollercoaster! Stay tuned for the upcoming sessions.
Court Room 4 : Hamburg v. Felixstowe
15:06 The claimants and respondents have arrived and are all eager for Round 2 to begin. They all look nervous as the arbitrators are having a chat before the rounds begin.
15:08 The rounds begin as the counsel for the Claimant starts softly. Oh, they seem nervous. The claimant proceeds to substantiate the issues with follow-up questions by the judges.
15:14 The respondents seem eager and keenly listen to the claimant’s arguments before the respected arbitrators.
15:18 As the last two minutes of submissions approach, the claimant endeavors to swiftly respond to the arbitrators’ questions. However, there appears to be hesitation in their answers now.
15:20 Speaker 1 concludes their submissions, and the Claimants introduce their second speaker, who exudes confidence in their arguments. The arbitrators keenly listen to the submissions of the Claimant.
15:25 The judges seem to smile amongst themselves upon hearing the speaker’s submissions. The speaker seems ill-prepared now as they fail to support their answer with case laws.
15:30 The speaker’s confidence appears to have been shattered by the previous line of questioning. They now exhibit hesitancy in all their responses. The arbitrators exchange smiles once more, and this time, it signals potential trouble.
15:34 The last 5 minutes remain on the clock, while the speaker tries to make up for time lost in questioning so far. They proceed with their last limb of the arguments hastily.
15:40 The arbitrators ask the claimant to proceed with their prayers after being dissatisfied with the answers to their questions.
15:42 The arguments presented by the claimants seem to bolster the confidence of the respondent side in their submissions. Speaker 1 of the respondent side begins their submissions with assurance.
15:44 A straightforward question on jurisdiction from the arbitrators appears to have broken the initial confidence that had been built up, disrupting the flow of the speaker. While the speaker appears to be knowledgeable about their arguments, they struggle to formally present them to the arbitrators.
15:51 As the judges continue to review the memorial before them, the speaker advances to their second point, presenting statutes and case laws to bolster their arguments.
15:53 After an intent review of the memorial, the arbitrators point out contradictions between the oral and written submissions. The speaker seems to be unaware of the questions and is asked to proceed in the last one minute on the clock.
15:55 The arbitrators offer the speaker a final opportunity to revise their submissions in order to avoid contradictions, leaving the respondents feeling bewildered. They summarize their submissions, making way for their speaker 2.
16:00 Speaker 2 stumbled when unable to answer one of the questions posed, yet swiftly redirected the arbitrators’ attention to their principal submissions, demonstrating wit and confidence.
16:02 The speaker demonstrates thorough preparation by aligning their oral arguments with their written submissions, showing they have learned from the mistakes of previous speakers.
16:08 The rebuttals commenced and appeared to conclude abruptly. Following this, the claimants take their seats, allowing the respondents to return to the podium.
16:10 The respondents’ sur-rebuttals took the form of clarifications rather than direct refutations of the opponents’ claims.
16:11 Before departing the room, the arbitrators provide general feedback, advising the speakers to be better prepared for their upcoming rounds due to the perceived sub-par performance.
16:13 The judges seem to be having a fun time in the room, while filling in score sheets. The claimants enter again and feedback begins.
16:17 The speakers receive feedback on both their arguments and their oratory skills, listening attentively. With this, the second session comes to an end.
Court Room 5 : Jeddah v. Paradeep
15:08 The claimants begin their submissions, but the arbitrators want a brief perusal of the facts first. Bang on with the first question, the bench questions the factual accuracy of the claimant’s statement. Satisfied and contended with the clarifications, the claimant finally proceeds with the arguments.
15:13 The arbitrator finds an argument particularly interesting, sharing his fascination with his fellow arbitrators, the bench collectively throws a deluge of questions in the claimant’s way. The claimant fails to dodge the queries, leaving the bench unsatisfied.
15:20 The grilling gets difficult, the claimant struggles to keep up with the questions. One minute left, the claimant is desperate to complete the arguments.
15:21 And Times Up! The bench puts down all and any requests for time extension. The second counsel for the claimant takes the dais.
15:26 The bench throws a challenging query to the Claimant. The claimant stands with unwavering confidence. The arbitrator seems more than pleased with the claimant’s explanations.
15:29 The claimant shields its arguments from the bench’s pointing queries. The shield though strong and assertive, seems to get weaker and weaker with each question.
15:34 The shield finally breaks, the claimant unable to cater to the queries, seeks permission to proceed with the subsequent issue of law.
15:37 The arbitrator gets creative with its questions and weaves a hypothetical scenario for the claimant to tackle. The arbitrator is not satisfied but due to the paucity of time, the claimant is requested to summarise its arguments.
15:40 The respondents now take on the dais. The respondent is impressively assertive with his submissions. Without wasting precious time, the respondent proceed with his first and foremost argument.
15:41 The bench gets hotter than ever and bombards the respondent with challenging questions. The respondent is tackling three arbitrators asking question based on three distinct issues in dispute.
15:46 The respondent is struggling with question from all the arbitrators, he fails to clarify a conundrum and pleads to move on with his subsequent submissions.
15:54 The respondent explores a fascinating aspect in his argumnets, the bench allows for a 30 second extension which is to be adjusted from the total time.
16:02 The respondent is crystal clear with her submissions and is thorough with the relevant law. A challenge for the judges ! The submissions give little to no avenue to the bench to cripple the respondent.
16:07 The respondent is now in a pickle. Casually strolling into the lion’s den, a slew of questions come her way as she fails to satisfy the bench in limited time.
16:11 The claimants re take the floor, with rebuttals. The counsel appears nervous, the rebuttals appear mild. She quickly summaries her arguments.
16:12 The respondents take on the dias with swiftness and confidence. They are firm with their submissions and answer all the questions of the bench to their satisfaction
Court Room 6 : Vancouver v. Vizag
15:00 Welcome to Round 2. It’s a sunny afternoon in Cuttack and the arbitrators have entered the room. They are going through their documents and interacting with volunteers, the session yet to begin.
15:15 Finally, the wait is over the round begins. The first counsel from the claimants begins by outlining their facts and three-pronged argument.
15:19 The Bench is coming into its element. One of the arbitrators has begun questioning the counsel on their arguments. The claimant clarifies their argument and calmly answers.
15:22 The Bench is coming into its element. One of the arbitrators has begun questioning the counsel on their arguments. The claimant clarifies their argument and calmly answers.
15:30 One of the arbitrators asked a question. To answer, the counsel requests the bench to examine documents. The counsel successfully answers and elaborates on their arguments. They are asked to further explain the law on the matter.
15:36 The arbitrator begins another line of questioning. The counsel struggles to elaborate on the details of the law. The counsel looks a bit confused.
15:47 The claimants are done. Now it’s time for the respondents to begin. The first respondent approaches the bench and begins explaining their client’s interests in an explanatory and level voice.
15:51 Only 10 minutes remaining! The arbitrators request the respondent to explain the crux of their first argument. Based off this, they start another line of questions, trying to ask trick questions. The respondent calmly responds.
16:17 A minute left and the arbitrators begin their line of questioning. One of them reacts by frowning, perplexed when the respondent contradicts themselves while answering of the questions. The respondent laughed for a bit only to realise the joke was on him.
16:25 Finally the round ends and the arbitrators begin their feedback, which is brief. They mention that each side had strong points but hope the teams will further refine their arguments in future rounds, paying attention to the specifics. They were advised to have a clear line of reasoning.
Court Room 7 : Savannah v. Shenzhen
15:11 As the day progresses, the winds catch on to the enthusiasm of the competition. The courtroom is abuzz with anticipation as the participants enter.
15:23 The claimant guides the bench through their arguments by pointing towards specific paragraphs. They cite cases to add strength to their argument by elaborating on the relevance of the case.
15:26 The bench listens intently, taking cognizance of all claims made, asking for clarifications as and when required. The claimant continues to clearly state all arguments.
15:29 The claimant asks for an extension to provide better clarity to their arguments. The bench silently hears the claims placed in front of them, leaving no clues as to whether or not they are convinced.
15:31 The second claimant takes the baton from the first claimant and furthers their contentions, persuasively building their case.
15:37 The bench has opened their bag of questions. The claimant closely listens to the queries posed and answers the questions. The bench cross questions the claimant based on their answers. The claimant navigates through and replies.
15:47 The bench grills the claimant, asking them for clarifications and questioning all basics. As the claimants end their arguments, the respondents come forth to present their side of the case. The respondent confidently begins with their arguments, presenting the bench with the facts.
15:51 The seas seem to roughen as the arbitrator pounces on the respondent’s argument. The respondent navigates through, while the bench rains questions upon them.
16:07 The second respondent begins, extending their arguments. Facts to the rescue! They build their case by pointing towards the facts.
16:19 The bench continues to grill the respondent, asking them questions at each response. The arbitrators seem critical of the arguments the respondent presents.
16:23 Chitty-Chitty Bang Bang is the way to go! The claimants return with a bang for the rebuttals. Beginning strong, the claimant rebuts the arguments presented by the respondents.
16:26 The bench is now in their element, firing questions one after another. The claimant expertly navigates, emerging through the storm with their ship still intact.
16:27 The Respondents have begun with their sur-rebuttals. The bench listens intently to the arguments presented as the time suddenly runs out.
Court Room 8 : Antwerp v. Jebel
15:11 Due to an inordinate situation, the rounds have been delayed until further notice.
DAY 1 | 15TH MARCH 2024
PRELIMINARY ROUNDS – SESSION 2
CONCLUDES!
Day 1 | 15th March 2024
PRELIMINARY ROUNDS
SESSION 3
Court Room 1 : Vizag v. Rotterdam
17:26 Emerging from the break rejuvenated and reinvigorated, teams dive back into the arena of moot court with renewed zeal and energy. The round is about to start.
17:29 With a determined resolve and unwavering composure, the claimant’s counsel dives straight into their submission. Like a steady hand guiding a ship through turbulent waters, they navigate through the intricacies of their argument with confidence, leaving no room for ambiguity.
17:31 The bench seizes upon a seemingly innocuous word in the submission, probing the claimants to defend their choice. This deliberate nitpicking serves as a test of the claimants’ resolve and attention to detail, challenging them to justify their linguistic choices.
17:35 With each reference to specific paragraphs in the memo, the bench delves deeper into the issue, challenging the claimant to defend their arguments with thoroughness and precision. In this courtroom tango, nothing is taken at face value, the bench questions everything that is being said.
17:40 The claimants find themselves at crossroads, faced with the formidable task of satisfying the arbitrators’ relentless curiosity. Whether they will rise to the occasion and meet the challenge head-on, or falter under the weight of scrutiny, remains to be seen.
17:43 The bench presents the Claimants with a hypothetical scenario, testing the bounds of their argumentation and forcing them to justify their claims. Will the Claimant counsel satisfy the bench given that the clock is ticking?
17:50 In a strategic move, the co-counsel begins to elucidate the submissions of their fellow speaker, aiming to bolster their collective argument and sway the bench in their favor. The absence of questions from the bench over the past two minutes leaves the courtroom in a state of suspense. Are the Arbitrators convinced by the arguments presented thus far, or are they deliberating in silence?
18:02 With an extension granted, the Claimants seize the opportunity to press forward, as the final seconds tick away, leaving the courtroom on edge, will the Claimants succeed in delivering their closing arguments or will the time slip through their fingers like sand.
18:04 As the counsel for the Respondent takes the dais, all eyes turn expectantly, awaiting their opening gambit. Will they succeed in swaying the Arbitrators with their persuasive advocacy, or will the Claimants’ arguments stand firm against the onslaught of scrutiny? Only time will reveal the victor.
18:09 With discerning scrutiny, the bench wastes no time in delving into the heart of the Respondent’s submissions just moments after they begin. Their swift dissection of the arguments signals towards a formidable challenge ahead for the Respondent.
18:14 In a pivotal moment of the proceedings, the bench presents a tantalizing offer to the respondent: the bench is willing to accept a claim of the respondent if they answer a very fundamental question that is posed in front of them. However, the respondent’s inability to substantiate the argument with a case law casts a shadow of doubt over their argument.
18:19 As the time for the counsel of the respondent comes to an end, the counsel scrambles to summarize their arguments into succinct bullets, their words racing to keep pace with the relentless march of time.
18:24 The co-counsel steps up to the dais, the probing questions from the bench seem to have struck a chord, casting a shadow of uncertainty over the co-counsel’s presentation. Yet, with each hesitant response and faltering pause, they strive to regain their footing.
18:30 “Is the tribunal with me?” asks the respondent as they take the bench to a specific paragraph in their memo. The courtroom holds its collective breath, awaiting the tribunal’s response, as the respondent endeavours to persuade them with the weight of their argument.
18:35 “TIMES UP” is flagged by the court room manager but the bench has asked a hypothetical question to the respondent posing a last challenge to them before they complete their submission. Will they rise to the challenge and salvage their position we are yet to see.
18:40 In a surprising turn of events, the bench opts to forego further questioning, signaling an end to the proceedings without the customary rebuttals and sur-rebuttals. The round finally comes to an end.
Court Room 2 : Shenzhen v. Santos
17:24 The air is thick with tension as the teams gear up for their speeches. The arbitrators are engaging in a light conversation before they can start their grilling.
17:31 The third arbitrator finally arrives, and another exciting round is about to begin. “Settle your tie first” the arbitrator reprimands as the first counsel from the claimant side approaches the podium.
17:33 Foregoing a summary of facts, the claimant immediately states his claims. The arbitrator’s question already stumps the counsel as he fumbles to give his answer. “Is there a difference between the UK and London?” the arbitrator continues to question the speaker.
17:36 The counsel is finally allowed to move on, elaborating on the submissions they make. This arbitrator will not let them off the hook apparently! They continue their questioning, until the counsel states that they are not aware of what they are being asked.
17:41 “Why were you in a hurry?” the arbitrator will not back down as he continues to grill the counsel, seemingly growing more dissatisfied with the responses.
17:42 The counsel tries to redirect the bench back to the third submission, eager to leave the podium as the 1 minute mark ticks close.
17:45 The Arbitrator has yet another technical question for the counsel. “If you know it, yes or no”, the Arbitrator will not tolerate any attempts to avoid the question.
17:50 “Sir my client is not a lawyer, he is not aware”, “Sir there does exist a problem that is why we are here” the session takes a more light-hearted turn as the bench and the counsel share a laugh, but the Claimant fails to justify its arguments.
17:52 The first counsel of the Claimants side breathes a sigh of relief as the second counsel takes their place. The Arbitrator has resumed their fiery questioning, not allowing a spare moment for the counsel. They look amused but allows the counsel to move on.
17:57 “Just tell us the issue” the Arbitrator exclaims, tired of the nervous rambling of the counsel. They move on to the next limb of arguments, and the counsel finally explains a precedent to establish their arguments.
17:59 This Arbitrator is proving that this is absolutely not a cold bench, with his relentless interrogation. The Arbitrator expertly traps the counsel into agreeing that they were in the wrong. The Arbitrator seems all too pleased with himself as the counsel tries to explain a crucial concept to the bench.
18:03 “The counsel is not prepared”, the Claimants seem to only understand the facts of the case at this crucial moment. The Arbitrator pushing their buttons at every other sentence.
18:06 “Ignorance of law is no excuse” the Arbitrator states as the counsel tries and fails to defend their client yet again.
18:09 Hooray! The Claimants’ speeches are finally done! We wait in anticipation to see the grilling of the respondents’ side as well.
18:10 Starting off with a grammatical correction of the speaker’s argument by the Arbitrator, the Respondent moves on with their argument, cool and collected.
18:13 The Arbitrator’s question is correctly understood by the Respondent who coolly addresses it, not losing steam at all. The bench, much like the speaker, will not back down anytime soon, asking for solid proof of the claims made.
18:16 This seems like an invigorating session for the Arbitrator, who has something to say to anything and everything put forth on the floor. The Respondent cites a case to support their argument, raffling through page numbers to direct the bench.
18:18 The Arbitrator is not convinced by the poised Respondent, claiming that their arguments are not substantiated. “This does not hold ground” they tell the Respondent, who then swiftly accepts their fate and moves on to the next argument.
18:21 The promising young speaker answers another line of questioning with ease as they have one minute left to go. The respondent does not agree with the arbitrator, stating that their client had no other choice to act upon. They have more to say, however, the arbitrator won’t have it, asking for a yes or no answer.
18:24 The relentless bench will not let go, quizzing the respondent on the most basic of concepts. A hypothetical scenario is presented and while the respondent is not convincing enough for the judges, they have the confidence to continue upholding their stance.
18:26 The last of the speeches! The second counsel of the respondents takes their place at the podium. The arbitrator points out a critical theory about which the respondent was not aware.
18:31 The respondent starts their submissions, vehemently disagreeing with the definition of “delivery” with the arbitrator. The bench asks a question which the respondent, the answer for which was not known to the respondents.
18:35 Moving on to the next claim, however, the arbitrator gives this one to the claimant. The silence of the bench seems to take the respondent by surprise, who starts finishing their arguments.
18:39 The bench asks for a landmark precedent concerning a particular law, and is satisfied with the response that they get. The bench is amused at the memorial submitted by the respondents, but not at the explanation given for the relevance of the case law to the issue at hand.
18:43 The round is soon coming to a close, with the second respondent wrapping up their arguments. The prayer is being stated, with the claimants reclaiming his place at the podium.
18:45 Rebuttal time!! This will be an entertaining watch for the bench and the opposing counsel, until it’s their turn again.
18:46 “It is an arbitration tribunal, not a drama case” the arbitrator has more witty remarks up their sleeve it seems. And time’s up! The bench grants the claimant an additional thirty seconds to finish their rebuttal.
18:49 Its feedback time! The teams eagerly listen to the feedback given by the knowledgeable arbitrators.
Court Room 3 : Felixstowe v. Jebel
17:20 Good evening dear audience! The snack break is over and teams have accommodated themselves in the courtroom, anxious yet ostentatiously calm while awaiting for the bench to arrive after savoring their cold tea.
17:23 The wait is finally over! They are on their desk, clearing out some confusion with the courtroom coordinator. The teams are giving a last look of composure as the grilling is yet to begin.
17:26 The claimant is on the dais, tracing his way through the submissions. Let’s see how long his argument pans out without any nitpicking by the enthusiastic bench.
17:29 Madam arbitrator continues with another composed question which has left the speaker dazed. The speaker’s reply has left more on the bench to dig up as loopholes. Let’s see how he carves his way out through the criss-cross maze.
17:31 As the claimant moves forward, the bench seems a little unsatisfied. The bench is indeed a hot one. The grilling continues. The speaker is being circled around his own argument and the long uninterrupted silence from the counsel seems to be heating up the courtroom.
17:39 Time’s Up now! The speaker is nervous, knowing well of the bench’s dissatisfaction. The timestamp has not stopped the grilling of the speaker. The bench is most interested to come down on any contention that the speaker is arguing for.
17:44 The speaker continues his line of arguments, anticipating the seeming throw of questions. And indeed his anticipation comes true. The bench is coming at him in full swing. There is no chance of slacking arguments, the bench is most adamant with their queries.
17:48 The Claimant has been caught off-guard, contradicting his prior argument. It seems difficult now for the speaker to escape the lion’s den. Let’s see if the speaker gets his breath back or succumbs to the pressure building in the room.
17:53 Time’s Up! But not for the bench to dismay their pertinent queries. The speaker continues with the justification. Now the Respondent is on the dais. Let’s see if they face the brunt or not.
17:56 Madam Arbitrator demands clarity on the question of title. The speaker is asserting his justification with the utmost composure. But the questions seem never-ending. The legal technicalities are putting the Respondent in leeway. However, the bench seems satisfied with his explanation. Another arrow of question lands on the speaker’s dais.
18:00 Flipping through the pages of the compendium, the speaker is stuttering through his argument. Oops! the Respondent has probably referred to a completely off case which has made the bench most displeased. The Appellant seems confused which looks worrisome as the speaker is succumbing to the bench’s queries.
18:04 The Respondent has once again tried to find a wayout in the memorial but the foothold seems weak. He is trying to argue with composure, but Madam Arbitrator is more confused than satisfied. The bench has declined the speaker’s pleading to move on to the next issue, digging every bit to bring the fallacies of arguments on-surface.
18:09 With only a minute left, the bench’s dissatisfaction is bolstering rather than flickering. To their surprise, the last justification by the speaker made the bench affirm with the speaker in consonance.
18:15 Interestingly, the respondent team is resting their most arguments on the memorial, which can be weakening or bolstering, but it is hard to tell now! However, the bench’s hunger for justification is satiated temporarily.
18:17 The short respite is diminishing as the bench continues its line of questions. The bench seems to puzzle the speakers rather than seeking a needed justification. None of the three arbitrators is in the mood to give breath to the speaker as he catches his stance with evident fumbles.
18:21 Hurrah! The bench is pleased with the justifications put forth by the speaker. A rare moment in this session of course! The speaker seems more confident now, placing their arguments swiftly, with utmost precaution.
18:24 Another play by the bench to toss the confidence in the air. Oops! the speaker has stumbled on the legal technicalities of maritime treaties. With no sufficient arguments, the time’s up for the rounds but the questions continue.
18:29 It has already been an extension of five minutes but the bench is unstoppable with their grill. The speaker is mostly silent and evidently in need of a respite from the heat being inflicted upon him.
18:31 To the utter surprise, the claimant has rejected an opportunity for rebuttal. The respondent seems displeased with the opposing party’s decision, asking the bench for their opportunity to be taken into consideration. There can be no sur-rebuttals without any rebuttals. However, the adamant respondent party is seeking clarification from the bench here, which is surprising, but for this unique session, unusual is mostly usual!
18:35 As the benchmarks the parties’ fate for their chance of going in the subsequent rounds, the audience is advised to show some respite for the parties making their submission. For in this session, they got none! Stay tuned and cool!
Court Room 4 : Paradeep v. Busan
17:13 The weather in Cuttack finally starts getting bearable, the participants get ready for the third preliminary rounds! The judges and participants are already set to start the session and exchange smiles.
17:16 The first counsel for the Claimants, approach the dais and start their arguments, and the judges humbly ask them to wait for a minute as they skim through the documents.
17:19 The judges before hearing the arguments, enquire about the statement of jurisdiction as the counsel cheekily agrees that they have done a mistake in their written submission.
17:20 As the counsel for the claimant submit their arguments, the respondent team aggressively pass chits amongst themselves. The counsel for the claimant confidently submits their argument, while the judges listen patiently.
17:26 With 5 minutes left, the counsel paces themself to finish their arguments in time. As they move to the concept of letter of indemnity, the judges seem to have a lot of questions regarding the same.
17:28 As the time for the first counsel of the Claimant is close to over, there is a visible sense of urgency on their face to put their arguments across.
17:34 The counsel seems unclear on the understanding of bailment, to which they frantically refer to their compendium to answer the questions of the judges.
17:37 Even though the time has come to an end, the arbitrators seem dissatisfied with the argument of the counsel, and ask them to revisit and research on the concept of bailment further. With this, the first counsel of the claimant comes to an end of their argument and opens the dais for their co-counsel.
17:42 The arbitrators circle back to basics, as they question on lien. After the counsel answers them, they follow up with the submission made by the first counsel of the claimants. The counsel gives an elaborate answer, to which the arbitrators seem fairly satisfied.
17:46 The counsel starts with their final submission and is interrupted by the arbitrators regarding the first submission which the counsel answers confidently. The Claimants are done with their submission and the arbitrators discuss the arguments amongst themselves.
17:49 The Claimants are done with their submission and the Arbitrators discuss the arguments amongst themselves. The first counsel of the Respondent approached the dais and is enquired about jurisdiction.
17:52 The Respondent while submitting their argument, is enquired about the endorsement mentioned in the prop. After several analogies offered by the counsel, the counsel resorts to their written submission to answer the questions.
17:58 The questions get more and more interesting and challenging, yet the counsel does not have a shred of nervousness on their face as they answer the questions confidently.
18:03 The counsel moves to the second limb of their argument and they are already down to 3 minutes! But the lack of time does not stop the Arbitrators from asking wily questions.
18:05 The Arbitrators smile slyly as the counsel walks into the web of tricky questions. Desperately, the counsel tries to answer the queries, while the Claimant team jot down the potential rebuttals.
18:08 Time is up for the first counsel of the Respondent, and the Arbitrators finally grant an additional 2 minutes to summarize the arguments. The counsel resorts to rebutting the written submission of the Claimants, to which they seem visibly nervous.
18:14 As the second counsel for the respondent start their submission, the arbitrators quickly identify a mistake in the written submission of the Respondent which the counsel tries to justify nervously.
18:19 Trying to overcome the initial hiccup, the counsel proceeds to the submission, but unfortunately, the arbitrators are not convinced with the application of good faith.
18:22 With 5 minutes left, it seems difficult for the counsel to convince the arbitrators with their arguments, but they recompose themselves and try to put their best foot forward!
18:25 Fortunately for the counsel, even though the sun has set in Cuttack, it seems to shine bright on them as the arbitrators seem to be on the same page as the counsel’s arguments and that gives them a new boost of confidence!
18:27 The time is over, but the questions of the arbitrators are not! The counsel answers the questions and hurriedly wraps up the submissions, in the additional two minutes granted.
18:33 The counsel of the Claimants gets ready to present their rebuttals and the arbitrator seems to be taken aback upon discovering that 7 minutes have been reserved for rebuttals and they politely ask the counsel to wrap it in a minute.
18:34 The rebuttals are over, and the Respondents get ready for the sur-rebuttals. The counsel for the Respondent categorically answers the questions put across by the Claimant in a crisp manner.
18:37 We come to the end of this round and the Convenor of the moot society of NLUO discusses the mix-up of memos.The Arbitrators clarify to the participants that this mix-up would not affect their scores.
18:40 As the arbitrators exclaim that this might be one of the best rounds they have observed in this moot, the blogging team could not agree more!
18:50 After a detailed feedback session, the judges score the performance of the participants and with that, we come to an end for this session.
Court Room 5 : Chabahar v. Colombo
17:18 And we are off to start with Session 3! The Counsel for the Claimant directly moves to discuss the issues at hand. The Bench listens with rapid attention.
17:23 The Arbitrator asks a question on the second issue to which the Claimant responds by directing the Bench to the statement of facts. They successfully deal with the question and further proceed with their submissions.
17:34 The co-counsel of the Claimant leads the progression in their arguments. The Arbitrator cleverly confusing the claimant with questions, ensuring them to go back and revisit the timelines of the case.
17:43 Friend or Foe? A jovial bench displaying their taste of humour in the arguments only to trap the Claimants in their questions going further.
17:47 And we start off with the Respondents. The counsel for the Respondents starts confidently enunciating the points favouring her argument. She also tries to use the benches’ arguments in their own favour.
18:00 The counsel for the Respondent is successfully able to conclude her arguments on time. They also happen to satisfy all the questions of the bench. Finally, we now move on with the second counsel for the Respondents on the dais.
18:03 “What is the spelling of Claimant?” Sir Arbitrator asks. He seems to be a bit annoyed and flustered as they seem to have skipped proof-reading the document and starts resorting to grilling them.
18:09 Sir Arbitrator is repeatedly questioning the Respondents by seeking further clarifications. The Respondent slowly but steadily proceeds to answer the queries of the Arbitrator and furthers her arguments.
18:14 And TIMES UP! Now, we arrive at the penultimate rebuttals (one of the most interesting stages) with the Counsel for the Claimant eloquently presenting their pleadings. The Bench is able to follow them easily. The Claimant also seeks to negate and disprove an interpretation “As Understood by the Respondents”.
18:22 This round has finally concluded with the sun going down in Cuttack. The Bench starts an internal discussion among themselves so as to decide upon the scoring of the participants. The stakes have gotten higher by each passing round!
Court Room 6 : Blair v. Antwerp
17:21 As the sun starts settling over the sky of NLUO, we begin with the 3rd Session of the day! The Counsel No. 1 for the claimant has started with the arguments of Issue No. 1. The Bench seems to be in a bit comforting mood as they quietly listen to the counsel.
17:27 I guess that didn’t go the way it was planned as the bench found a big loophole and now we see what an actual grilling is! It is a hot bench and Respondents seem nervous with what is going on in the Courtroom. The Counsel is trying his best to defend his arguments.
17:39 Counsel No. 2 has presented a smooth submission till now, the Arbitrators are finding something in the written pleadings while consciously listening to the claimant. Arbitrator No. 1 is persistently questioning the Counsel about validity of the arguments whereas the other two Arbitrators seem to be convinced.
17:46 Last 1 minute of the Counsel and they are sailing smooth towards the end of their submissions. The Bench seems satisfied as a 2 minute extension is provided to the Counsel.
17:48 The Best part is here! The Bench is asking the Counsel to answer a question from the Respondent’s perspective. The Respondent takes a breath, analyses and provides a suitable argument.
17:51 After a brief discussion among the Bench, permission is granted to the Respondent’s counsel No.1 to go forward with the submissions.
17:53 Indeed a hot Bench, as they observe some disparity between the written and oral pleadings. The Counsel refers to the written document and presents clarification to the Bench in a noticeable calm and composed manner.
18:03 As we move towards the last 3 minutes, the Bench asks for a clarification from the Counsel regarding proper implementation of procedure. With an exchange of clarifications between the Bench and the Counsel, the latter moves towards the other issue at hand.
18:10 The Counsel, although a bit hurdled, navigates through the questions and passes the baton to co-counsel.
18:11 The bench takes a 5 minute break! Both the sides now seem equally tensed and tired as they discuss among themselves.
18:17 The Courtroom restarts, the AC room gets warmer as a Grilling Round 2 begins! Counsel no. 2 tries her best not to fumble and lose her composure. She asks for a repetition of the query and replies after recollecting her strongest possible answer. Their researcher seems surprisingly surprised.
18:25 The moment is here! The counsel has convinced the bench regarding their queries. A big go ahead has been shown by the Arbitrator as we head towards the last 5 minutes.
18:28 A fundamental question has been asked by Arbitrator, the courtroom awaits for the counsel’s response. Will the counsel able to answer it? Let’s see.
18:30 Streak continues! Despite the twisted questions, the counsel has defended well and has catered the queries.
18:31 Times up! But the questions of the bench continues. The game of interpretation is being played as clarity on the written submissions is asked again by the bench.
18:35 The submissions of the respondents ends here as the counsel quickly summarizes the arguments. The Courtroom moves towards Rebuttals and sur-rebuttals.
18:42 Respondents begin with their surrebuttals. The Bench gives a look waiting for the counsel to make a wrong move. This marks the end of the session.
Court Room 7 : Dalian v. Mundra
17:23 The judges and the teams have taken their seats, and all arrangements have been finalized. With everything in place, the third round for the day is set to commence.
17:29 The speaker is maintaining a strong position by referencing materials and addressing questions posed by the arbitrators. However, one arbitrator questions whether the claimants wish to pursue a specific issue. Undeterred, the speaker stands firm and persists with their arguments.
17:36 With just 2 minutes remaining on the clock, it appears that the Claimant has concluded their arguments. However, the Arbitrators have only just begun with their line of questioning, indicating that the discussion is far from over.
17:41 The second speaker of the Claimant side has taken the floor by storm, reserving 12 minutes on the clock and launching into their arguments with strength and confidence.
17:44 As the arbitrators pose the first question, the claimant responds calmly and confidently, referencing a relevant case to support their argument. A minor disagreement arises between the claimant and the arbitrators, but the claimant remains steadfast in their position.
17:53 With time ticking down like the sands in an hourglass, the claimant stands as a lone warrior against a tide of doubt. Their arguments like anchors in a stormy sea. With this pressure, will the claimant be able to sway the judges to their side?
17:57 The respondent has confidently assumed their position behind the podium, presenting strong arguments with a convincing tone.
18:00 Questions are already being fired at the respondents like arrows. Will they weather this intense interrogation? Only time will reveal their fate.
18:04 The arbitrators’ questions hit the respondent like a sudden gust of wind, momentarily throwing them off balance. However, like a skilled sailor adjusting their sails in turbulent waters, the respondent takes a brief pause to recalibrate before returning with a strong and resolute response.
18:10 A dialogue ensues between the respondent and the arbitrators, akin to a chess match where each move is carefully analyzed. While one side seeks to unravel the intricacies of the other’s arguments, the other remains vigilant, defending their position.
18:14 The Arbitrators express their desire to “get into the crux of the arguments”, signaling their intent to delve deeply into the core issues presented by Respondent 2 at the outset of their arguments.
18:20 As the Arbitrators continue their questioning, the Respondents’ side appears somewhat flustered. While one Respondent struggles to navigate the interrogation, the others are actively brainstorming possible responses to aid their comrade and strengthen their collective position.
18:29 Now start the rebuttals! The Claimant enters the scene with a strong and unwavering stance, endeavoring to sway the Arbitrators in this remaining time. Nevertheless, the judges have wasted no time and have already started their line of questioning.
18:32 Claimant 2 has seized the floor to address a specific question posed by the Arbitrators. With a sense of urgency evident in their voice, they make their final attempts to convey their position convincingly.
18:35 The respondent initially appears confused, but they quickly regain their composure and resume their rebuttal with a strong reference, marking the end of this round.
Court Room 8 : Bremen v. Klang
17:18 Good evening everyone! Court room 8 reconvenes and the atmosphere is exhilarating. The Arbitrators seem to be in a jolly mood, not the same can be said for our Claimants, who seem rather tense. The wait for the Respondents continues.
17:20 The permission for the Claimants to approach the dais arrived before the Claimants could. Is this round going to be an ex-parte?
17:24 The pleadings begin ex-parte. The Claimant attempted to establish the jurisdiction of the tribunal despite it not being in dispute. Needless to say, the tribunal did not react well. We move on to the issues.
17:30 With 3 minutes left, the Arbitrator requested for a copy of the Act, the Claimant happily offered the one they were using! Such confidence.
17:34 The Arbitrator asked a question, the Claimant discreetly avoided answering it. “God sees all”, it seems that so do the Arbitrators, as they clearly stated their question again.
17:38 The Claimant’s confidence could not be substantiated by their knowledge, the Arbitrator politely returned back the act, asking “why did you give it, if you needed it.”
17:44 The copy saga continues. An attempt by the Claimants to yet again give their copy to the Arbitrators is politely refused. This saga is made tragic as the Claimant realizes that the compendium submitted by him is wrong. Their request to provide a soft copy is politely refused.
17:59 The Arbitrators seem exhausted, pinching of the nose bridge is never something you want to see in the Arbitration Hall. The Claimant has reached his last contention, and the Arbitrators their last nerve.
18:02 The Claimant has managed to finish his extension for the third time, it remains to be seen when they’ll manage to finish his argument.
18:04 The Claimants finish their arguments and promptly leave the Arbitration Hall.
DAY 1 | 15TH MARCH 2024
PRELIMINARY ROUNDS – SESSION 3
CONCLUDES!
Day 1 | 15th March 2024
PRELIMINARY ROUNDS
SESSION 4
Court Room 1 : Chabahar v. Jeddah
19:21 It has been quite the day! Finally, we have arrived for today’s last session. The teams are seated as they go through their arguments one last time before the speeches begin.
19:23 Claimants’ second speaker has taken the podium. With a coherent structure, they audaciously begin their proposals. They are interacting with the bench well and presenting their arguments with clarity.
19:25 The Arbitrators have posed their first question and the speaker tackles them confidently. The arbitrators seem to be content with the answer.
19:28 One of the arbitrators tricks the speaker with an intricate question and the speaker loses their momentum. But nothing will stop them from rising back up with their subtle credence.
19:32 “So you’re admitting that you did not initially fulfil your obligations?” says the arbitrator as they catch the speaker slacking in their arguments.
19:35 The bench seeks straightforward responses to straightforward queries. Rather than taking a circuitous and protracted route that leads back to the starting point, it is incumbent upon the Speakers to discern what the moment requires.
19:40 Speaker 2 comes on to take over the momentum of their submissions and the bench senses a fallacy in the facts stated by the speaker.
19:43 “But that is not what happened” says one of the arbitrators as they find a discretion in the clause being stated by the claimants.
19:50 Upon bringing up a query, for a brief while, the speaker remains mute. The hush in the courtroom is deafening. The attorney speaks again gradually, but the judges are not satisfied with his response since they keep asking follow-up questions.
19:52 The claimants side presents their final issues amidst a storm of raging questioning with only a minute left on the clock.
19:54 The first counsel for the respondent now takes the stand in front of the judges and clearly presents the problems. The submissions begin, and the speaker skillfully guides the tribunal through their arguments.
20:04 Seems like it’s past the bedtime of the courtroom managers as they unconsciously present the wrong time stamp, giving the respondent 10 minutes more than the time they have been allotted. The arbitrators point out the error and share a chuckle over the same.
20:11 Disagreements arise between the speaker and the arbitrators and the arbitrators seem to be taken aback by the statements made by the speaker as a string of counterproductive statements stems from the arguments made.
20:15 Arbitrators seem to be delving into the nuances of the facts and there is a hint of skepticism on their faces as the speaker fails to satisfy them with their answers.
20:19 The time is up for the Respondents but the arbitrators decide to continue with questions and give time to the respondent to conclude their arguments. Time is surely not a constraint in this courtroom, giving some relief to the drowsy courtroom managers.
20:23 No rebuttals or sur-rebuttals are being entertained. The arbitrators ask the participants to give them the room for discussion.
20:26 After an exciting first day, Court Room 1 concludes its sessions. We’re excited to see what Day 2 delivers, as teams will return with renewed vigor to compete for the final championship. Goodnight, and thank you!
Court Room 2 : Bremen v. Vancouver
19:15 Good evening everyone! As we are all set for the last session of the day, a sense of eagerness is visible on the faces. The arbitrators are seated, while the participants make their way to the seats. There is anticipation on the inside, and confidence on their faces. The Courtroom Managers note down their time divisions as we await for the rounds to begin.
19:22 As they await the last arbitrator, the claimants meticulously gather their papers, their anticipation mounting with each passing moment. Meanwhile, the respondents impatiently yearn for the rounds to reach their conclusion, their eagerness palpable in the air.
19:24 With the arrival of the third arbitrator, attention is drawn to the immaculate state of the claimants’ attire. It remains to be seen whether the pristine appearance reflects the strength of their arguments.
19:26 The claimant, dressed unusually, requests permission to approach the dais. Meanwhile, the arbitrators engross themselves in reading the memorials placed before them, as the claimant endeavors to capture their attention.
19:29 The arbitrators start an aggressive line of questioning, quickly dismissing the submissions. A question of “why?” follows every answer of the claimant.
19:32 The arbitrator inquires, “Counsel, do you understand your client’s position?” This prompts a round of laughter among the arbitrators.
19:35 The claimant, bewildered and subjected to heckling by the arbitrators, attempts to continue with their submissions.
19:37 As the clock ticks down to the last minute, the arbitrators highlight the claimant’s fundamental grammatical errors. Despite the claimant’s confident responses, the arbitrators remain dissatisfied.
19:39 The claimant is granted an additional 30 seconds, yet the arbitrators continue to appear perplexed, struggling to comprehend the situation. The arbitrators seek to find answers while claimants are unable to provide them with the same.
19:42 The arbitrator poses a straightforward question to the second speaker, “What actions did your client take?” However, the claimant appears oblivious to the answer, indicating a lack of familiarity with their moot proposition.
19:46 The only aspect that seems to appease the arbitrators is the quality of the coffee. Meanwhile, as the claimant continues with their submissions, the arbitrators pose elementary maritime inquiries.
19:49 The claimant concludes their response with the phrase “To the best of my knowledge,” eliciting smiles from the arbitrators.
19:52 The arbitrator inquires if the claimant’s clients are amenable to negotiation, to which the speaker delivers a clever response. Continuing the line of questioning, the arbitrator prompts the claimant to empathize with their clients. “Diplomatically correct card,” the arbitrator quips, visibly content with the response this time.
19:57 The claimant summarizes their submissions and goes back to their seat, while the respondent assembles their papers and approaches the podium with a kind of confidence all aspire to have.
20:00 Once more, the arbitrators initiate a barrage of probing questions for the respondents, who endeavor to maintain their composure amidst the series of questions. A simple “yes or no” question seems daunting to the speaker.
20:05 The arbitrators criticize the respondent’s client for their perceived lack of business acumen, simultaneously taunting the respondent by asserting the weakness of their case.
20:08 Unable to respond, the speaker quietly exits while their second speaker steps in to address the questions posed to their preceding speaker. Expressing dissatisfaction with the current submissions, the arbitrators urge the respondent to continue with the remainder of their arguments.
20:17 The speaker effortlessly catches the arbitrators’ attention by dropping case law references like confetti at a legal party. In the midst of the questioning, they’re like a cool cucumber amidst the nervous faces.
20:20 The arbitrator gently jabs, “Counsel, it appears you’re in the dark about the facts.” Meanwhile, the respondent, usually brimming with confidence, requests a moment to illuminate themselves on these basic facts, flipping through the papers.
20:25 With just two minutes left on the clock, the arbitrator impatiently presents a submission on behalf of the respondent, clearly agitated by the dwindling time.
20:27 The respondent speaker wraps up their points and returns to their seat, while the claimant moves on to their rebuttals, seeking clarifications from the respondent’s side.
20:31 The respondent approaches the dais with confidence, and quickly sums up their sur-rebuttals in two minutes, leaving the arbitrators satisfied with the concise argument.
20:34 With the rebuttals and sur-rebuttals done, the round resembles a lively ping-pong match, with questions bouncing back and forth. As the feedback session commences, the speakers receive not just critiques on their arguments, but also an assessment of their demeanor.
20:37 The feedback sessions are over, with the participants making their way back. The rounds end with a smile over everyone’s faces as the long day ends for all.
Court Room 3 : Blair v. Hamburg
20:00 Due to unforeseen circumstances, the rounds have been delayed until further notice.
Court Room 4 : Klang v. Vizag
19:12 The teams are getting ready for their last round today. The arbitrators and the respondents have arrived in the room and are eagerly waiting for the round to start.
19:24 The wait is over. Because the claimants have not arrived in the round, the first counsel for the respondent has begun speaking and presenting their arguments.
19:29 The arbitrators have asked the respondent a few questions to clarify their arguments and further elaborate. They ask the respondent for further legal backing before the respondent can move to the next argument.
19:34 With 3 minutes remaining, the arbitrators point out contradictory aspects in the respondent’s arguments. They seem to be satisfied with the counsel’s replies to their questions.
19:37 Time is almost up and the respondent is rushing to finish the explanation of their points. They request another 30 seconds for summarising all their points.
19:39 The arbitrators ask about a specific clause and inquire the respondent about precedents related to the clause. The respondent hesitates in answering the arbitrator’s questions. They look through their documents but are unable to answer.
19:45 The arbitrator questions the respondent about a source they are using, which is not part of the compendium but a research article. They question them about the usage of the article and its relevance. The arbitrators make a comment about them not researching properly.
19:53 The first counsel from the respondent’s side finishes with the arbitrator’s questions and the second respondent is asked to come to the bench. He begins by refuting the claimant’s arguments in a confident and bold voice.
19:59 As the respondent continues speaking, the arbitrators are making facial expressions of confusion and disagreement. They look unconvinced at the respondent’s points. One of them asks a question to clarify.
20:06 The respondent has to take a moment to look through the given laws to answer the bench’s questions. The tribunal is grilling them on questions of the law.
20:13 As both of the respondent’s counsels have finished speaking, they now begin explaining certain legal provisions and how certain clauses should be applied. The arbitrator is quick to correct their interpretation of the clause.
20:16 The bench seems to be having a discussion about the moot problem and the nuances of maritime law among themselves while the respondents sit and wait for further feedback.
20:20 The bench gives more feedback to the respondents, mentioning their lack of research and lack of depth to their arguments. The respondents did not have enough citations but they also receive some praise for their strong oral arguments and calm demeanour. With this, we come to an end to the first day of IMAM 2024. See you guys tomorrow!
Court Room 5 : Mundra v. Shenzhen
19:15 Even as we enter the last session of the day, the energy levels remain at an all time high. This is evident from the spring in the participants’ steps as they enter the courtroom.
19:22 The claimant gathers his wits and ploughs through as they begin the presentation of the claims. The Bench listens intently, asking for clarification at every line spoken.
19:33 Time’s up but the Arbitrators don’t seem to back down, asking for clarification on one last issue. The Claimant quickly replies to their query, trying their best to satisfy the Bench.
19:39 There seems to be no dearth of questions in the minds of the Arbitrators as they grill the Claimant. The Claimant asks for some time and soon begins with their response.
19:42 The Arbitrators are on fire today. The Claimant cannot gather their wits fast enough as the Bench shoot questions one after the other.
19:45 The back and forth continues as the Bench questions the very base of the arguments presented by the Claimant. The Claimant answers the questions as they come.
19:52 The Claimant side passes information to their speaker to aid them answering the queries posed by the Arbitrators. The constraint of time is evident as the extension time runs out as well.
19:57 The Bench listens intently, ready to pounce at any opening. BAM! They found it. The grilling of the Respondent has begun.
20:00 The Arbitrator does not let up. The Respondent struggles as the Arbitrator fires questions without any mercy. The Respondent begins with the next argument only to be stopped by the wall of questions the Arbitrator has put up.
20:06 The Bench does not seem convinced. Any answers the Respondent presents, the bench peruses with a fine comb. The Respondent is still not deterred, they keep on answering the questions asked, not backing out of their quest to satisfy the queries of the Bench.
20:20 The respondent closes their arguments with a sum up of their claims. The claimant had been waiting for this moment. They have begun their rebuttals, attacking the points put forth by the respondents questioning the validity of their claims.
20:25 The round ends on a high as the bench provides valuable feedback to the participants.
Court Room 6 : Dalian v. Savannah
20:00 Due to unforeseen circumstances, the rounds have been delayed until further notice.
Court Room 7 : Antwerp v. Felixstowe
19:11 Amidst the unfolding narrative of facts, the bench interjects, urging the Counsel for the Claimant side to swiftly navigate to the heart of the matter—the issues at hand. With this prompt, the Counsel recalibrates their approach, and starts with their submissions.
19:15 Undeterred by the barrage of questions hurled their way in the initial moments, the Counsel for the Claimant remains resolute and assertive in their submissions. With every response, they fortify their stance, demonstrating a steadfast commitment to their argument.
19:22 The bench poses an inquisitive question that proves to be a stumbling block for the Counsel, leaving them unable to provide a satisfactory response. As the clock ticks inexorably towards the end of their alloted time, the Counsel’s opportunity slips away and their speaking time comes to an end.
19:28 As the arbitrators continue their relentless grilling, the co-counsel tries their best to answer each question, whether they will emerge unscathed from this intense barrage of questioning remains uncertain.
19:33 “TIMES UP” has been flagged by the court room manager, the Co-Counsel however is still going with their submissions trying to sway the Arbitrators in their favour.
19:39 With an air of confidence and a firm grasp of their facts, the Counsel for the Respondent side takes the podium, exuding a demeanour of assurance that commands attention. However, the looming question remains: will their confidence withstand the relentless interrogation by the Bench?
19:47 The Respondent remains steadfast, their resolve unyielding as they stand their ground against the onslaught of questioning. In this fiery back-and-forth, the Respondent’s unwavering determination shines through, casting them as a formidable contender in the courtroom battle of wits.
19:52 Despite the Respondent’s earnest efforts, the Bench remains unconvinced, peppering them with a relentless barrage of questions that pierce through their confidence. With each query, the scrutiny intensifies, leaving the Respondent grappling for answers.
19:59 As the bench poses a technical question, a ripple of uncertainty courses through the Respondent’s defence, momentarily halting their confident stride. Caught off guard by the complexity of the inquiry, they find themselves grappling for a solution.
20:05 Even as the Counsel begins their prayer, the bench wastes no time in posing a question, in their prayer, will the Respondent dazzle us with their legal brilliance, or are we in for a wild ride on the rollercoaster of legal uncertainty?
20:11 In a stunning comeback, the Respondents deliver a compelling sur-rebuttal that leaves the courtroom buzzing with anticipation. The conclusion of the round leaves everyone wondering: who will emerge victorious in this gripping contest of legal wit and prowess?
Court Room 8 : Colombo v. Paradeep
19:11 Welcome to today’s last round of this esteemed Moot Court Competition. The Claimant’s first speaker has approached the podium with utmost confidence as they start substantiating their claims.
19:15 The Arbitrator keeps questioning the Claimant, asking for the nuances and details of the argument made. They are not entirely sold yet. The Arbitrator emphasises on a mandate and asks for legal backing, which the Claimant lacks.
19:18 The arbitrator is firm in wanting an authority for the case mentioned which the Claimant essentially should have had. The Arbitrator seems far from pleased at this.
19:25 The bench poses a good question, easily countered by the Claimant however the answer does not seem satisfactory to the Arbitrators. The follow up questions seems to confuse the Counsel and the Arbitrators share a laugh, enjoying their witty remark thoroughly.
19:30 We are now joined by the second Counsel from the Claimant’s side, to pick up from where the first Counsel left. The Claimant is met with follow up questions from the Bench which they are unable to tackle.
19:34 The Claimant makes their case but seems more confused with every question posed to them. Their attempt to brush off the question is met with “its not similar” from the arbitrator who is not having the roundabout way of attempting to answer the question.
19:37 “The answer is in the question itself” the Arbitrators break the Claimant’s argument skilfully, using a simple contractual term.
19:40 The Counsel finally approaches their last issue. The bench directs the Claimant to a particular clause asking for a specific jurisdiction. The Claimant is not able to respond, which the judges graciously accept.
19:45 The first Counsel of the Respondents starts their speech in a very structured and systematic manner, after which the Bench already starts their line of questioning. The Counsel speaks with conviction and makes their issues known very concisely.
19:53 The Counsel is once again met with silence after they direct the Bench to a clause allegedly supporting their claim. The Counsel brings up another term, however is unable to explain it to the Bench.
19:57 The bench is unable to understand the claims made stating that it is blatantly contrary to their case. The Arbitrators look on in confusion as the clock ticks, a mere three minutes left.
20:09 The last Counsel loses conviction with every successive argument they make and so do the judges. Met with silence, the round proceeds to the next submission.
20:15 The round starts picking up speed as the arbitrators and the counsel get back on track. As the time runs out, the counsel submits their remaining claims, summarising their main points.
20:19 The arbitrator poses a tricky question which is handled with ease by the counsel, a cool demeanor in place at a time of urgency. Finally, a summary is given and the respondent concludes.
20:27 This round of rebuttals does not escape from the fire of the bench, who question the counsel back to back.
20:29 And with that, we come to the end of the last round today! It was enrapturing to watch the participants, who walk out after making their final claims.
20:30 The arbitrators discuss amongst themselves, preparing to give their feedback to the impressionable speakers.
DAY 1 | 15TH MARCH 2024
PRELIMINARY ROUNDS – SESSION 4
CONCLUDES!
Day 2 | 16th March 2024
SoS ROUNDS
SESSION 2
Court Room 8 : Antwerp v. Jebel
10:42 With the beginning of a new day we see a new zeal and enthusiasm in the participants. The courtroom is abuzz with energy.
10:44 The Claimant has taken their place at the podium and has begun strong, placing their claims with conviction and confidence.
10:51 The river of questions does not run dry! The bench does not seem to be satisfied by only one answer, they ask the Claimant one question after the other, seeking clarifications on every fact placed before them.
10:53 The Claimant scrambles to gather their wits and their claims as they bench fires questions one after the other. But the Claimant does not back down, they persevere through trying their best to answer all questions.
10:57 The second Claimant has taken over, they now bear the torrent of questions the bench has in store for them.
11:00 The grilling continues. The bench does not seem too satisfied with the claims put forth and the backing given to them. The Claimant tries their best to persuade the Arbitrators otherwise.
11:03 Teamwork for the win! The Claimants discuss amongst each other and help their speaker clarify the bench’s queries and build their case stronger.
11:09 Time favours none. The Claimant asks for an extension to better elaborate on their claims. The bench seems benevolent, they have granted the extension for a quick summary.
11:13 The Respondent claims the stage. They begin with their arguments, only to be stopped by the bench with a query.
11:16 The Respondent expertly navigates the rough seas, matching each question of the bench with a strong answer of their own.
11:22 The bench is on fire today! Their bag of queries seems bottomless. The Respondent ploughs through, not letting any questions go unanswered, adding backing to each claim made, calm in the face of the storm.
11:27 The time has slipped away with the bench still left with queries. An extension is granted for better understanding of the arguments and claims made.
11:32 The Respondent has passed the baton to their co-speaker who now participates in a sizzling exchange back and forth.
11:36 The Respondent relies on documentary evidence but the bench is still not convinced. No claim goes by without questioning. The Respondent works hard to defend their case.
11:46 Extensions are the need of the hour. The bench’s queries are endless and the respondent tries their best to satisfy all questions raised, taking help from the team and building up their case.
11:49 The Claimants come back with their swords drawn, rebutting the Respondent’s arguments. The Respondents do not falter. They use the sur-rebuttals to build back their case. With feedback to the parties, the SOS session comes to an end. Stay tuned as we get ready to start Session 5 soon!
DAY 2 | 16TH MARCH 2024
SoS ROUNDS – SESSION 2
CONCLUDES!
Day 2 | 16th March 2024
SoS ROUNDS
SESSION 4
Court Room 3 : Blair v. Hamburg
10:57 Welcome to Day Two of the Proceedings! Bright and early, the participants have taken their seats on the benches,
tension as intense as the heatwaves yet confidence radiating like the sun. The Arbitrators have finally arrived, let the showdown begin!
10:58 The claimant takes on the dais, arbitrators want to dive straight into the argumentation putting down need for summarization of facts.
11:01 The Claimant points out an interesting detail in the factual matrix, impressing the arbitrators. The Arbitrators catch up quickly, and throw a difficult question the Claimant’s way. The claimant concedes to the errors of the arguments and pleads to proceed with his next submission.
11:06 The times up, but the Arbitrators seem keen on the last submission and continue with their challenging questions. The disagreement between the bench and the counsel grows intense. Like a quidditch match, arguments questions and counter-questions fly to and fro in the room. The Claimant is adamant to sore high towards victory but it seems difficult in this courtroom.
11:11 The Arbitrator is stuck on a particular question of law. All struggles to break free are in vain. The counsel kneels before the last question of the Arbitrators. The Arbitrators continue their questions as the counsel is fresh out of novel arguments.
11:15 The second counsel of the Claimants takes on the dais. The bench reiterates the last query. The counsel seems to have better clarity on the issue and answers head on.
11:18 As the Claimants moves forward with their submissions, the arbitrators promptly look into their written submissions and throw their way a query. The Claimant is well versed with their legal stance, they satisfy the bench with a well worded explanation.
11:22 The bench is carefully scrutinizing every word written, every comma and every semicolon of the written submissions. The questions are getting more challenging with each intricacy being pointed by the bench. The Claimant is standing strong in front of all the queries coming their way.
11:30 The Arbitrators seem like a jury of owls, observing every submission with keen eyes. The counsel refers to a case law to pacify the arbitrators, but all in vain. The bench is keen on highlighting the lacunae in the Claimant’s arguments. The counsel fails to satisfy the bench and pleads to move on with further submissions.
11:33 Time’s up, but the disagreement between the bench and counsel is growing intense with each passing minute. The Claimant is desperately struggling to keep her ground. The Claimants are failing incessantly in substantiating their arguments. The bench is far from satisfied and prompts the Claimant to summarize all arguments.
11:39 A challenge is thrown the Claimant’s way, they now need to summarize one particular argument in 30 seconds. The Claimant is getting tense and fails to pacify the arbitrators.
11:42 The Respondents have taken the dais. They seem intimidated by the bench after observing a difficult time for the claimant. Bang on with the first question, the bench is unsatisfied with the foremost submission itself. The counsel is struggling with the questions. The Respondent has no arrows left in his quiver.
11:47 The co-counsel comes to the rescue. With the bench’s kind approval, the courtroom managers take a note to the arguing counsel. This novel argument seems to pacify the bench.
11:49 The counsel refers to a case law which seems to have finally impressed the bench. But the apparent appreciation appears to be a mirage. The Arbitrators have promptly caught on a legal lacunae which the counsel has failed to substantiate. The counsel pleads to move with subsequent submissions.
11:56 Time’s up, yet again the bench is intrigued by a refrence made by the counsel to the fact sheet. The counsel misses an intricacy of his argument but the bench is too attentive to let go. The respondents are now stuck in a maze of arguments and questions. All desperate attempts to come free are in vain. The bench is still persistent with its questions.
12:00 The bench calls to the second counsel realising the paucity of time. The counsel takes on with confidence and assertion. The courtoom echoes with the respondent’s firm submissions. While the bench is relentless with their inquiries, the respondent is tackling each question with impressive clarity.
12:05 The bench has now resorted to more complex questions. The respondents fail to address the three-fold question thrown at them.
12:08 What looks like a game of tennis, the counsel seems to have come out victorious from a to and fro round of questions and answers. He pleads to move on with the next submission. The bench is keenly listening to the arguments, finding their moment to break the arguments presented.
12:12 The respondents are carefully weaving the facts into their arguments. The bench is tearing apart every clarification and explanation presented. The respondent seems drained from the continuous questioning.
12:15 The respondent seems to have finally found a strong argument. The bench is impressed and is listening with unusual appreciation. The respondent proceeds with the next submission with new found confidence.
12:18 The respondents make a smart reference to a case law to substantiate their arguments. The bench seems to be convinced to the already established position of law and refrains from questioning further.
12:20 The respondent finally proceeds with the prayer. They summarizes their arguments quickly to the satisfaction of the bench.
Court Room 6 : Dalian v. Savannah
10:53 Good morning, it’s a bright sunny day here in Cuttack. All parties have assembled and the bench has given the parties the go-ahead to start the session. Let us see how this round plays out.
10:57 Counsel 1 for the Claimant starts strong by seemingly having all arguments learned by heart. The bench sits attentively trying to understand the issue at hand, let’s see when the arbitrators interrupt this smooth flow of arguments.
11:04 After a series of questions directed towards speaker 1, its full time for the counsel for the claimant. They seem to be in noticeable distress maybe realizing the time crunch and their stance, nonetheless the bench has given them an extension suggesting the claimant to “take it easy”.
11:10 Council 2 for Claimants seems promising to start off with boldness in their voice, but the arbitrators seem in no mood to take anything but logic-backed claims as opposed to fairy tale reasoning to substantiate party’s arguments.
11:14 The Claimant continues by giving an analogy to make their point clearer yet again is interrupted mid-sentence by the Arbitrator. Fumbling through the pages to find certain paragraphs the Claimant tries to hold steady ground for rest of their time left.
11:23 The Claimant asking for an extension of a minute, drives through with full force to complete their set of arguments, making their mission to not leave anything unserved to the Arbitrators.
11:36 Respondent eloquently proceeds with explaining their case to the Bench. With only a few questions thrown at the Respondent, the wind seems to be favoring the likes of the Respondents.
11:39 How do we spot the difference between a bench being satisfied or the bench turning cold? This round seems to make the point clear for a third party observing the round. There seems to be a sense of comfort reached by the respondent and the bench.
11:43 With a minute left, the Respondents concluded their argument, but there seems to be a confusion arising in the last lap of the Respondent’s time. The Bench finding has pointed out a flaw in the line of arguments proposed by the Respondent, with a sly smile the Bench allows the Respondent to proceed with their case.
12:00 Is the Respondent side contradicting themselves? the Bench seeks clarification on a authority stated by the Respondent asking to prove its validity. With chits being passed to the Respondent, they try to stir their ship to clearer waters.
12:10 There seems to exist a pattern with Respondent speaker leaving the Bench confused during the last few minutes, but the Bench seems to see right through their intentions. Have the tables turned? it will all be clear in the next few minutes.
12:15 The Bench continues to nitpick on specific contentions as put forth by the Respondent, it is to see whether the Respondent stands the test of time, which is running out soon.
12:19 The Respondent is granted another extension for briefly summarizing the main contentions of their case.
DAY 2 | 16TH MARCH 2024
SoS ROUNDS – SESSION 4
CONCLUDES!
Day 2 | 16th March 2024
PRELIMINARY ROUNDS
SESSION 5
Court Room 1 : Santos v. Dalian
12:42 Dear Audience, welcome to the second day of the IMAM 2024. The bench is all set with arbitrators relishing their feast as the room awaits the respondent party to fill up their space. This warm day would write fate for our dear participants as they race for the quarterfinals. The room is at ease with the vibrant fragrance and chitchat of the arbitrators, nevertheless, the suspense is yet to weave its play.
12:47 Here is the much-awaited respondent team as they enter the room, flashing nervousness yet composure. The formalities are being completed hurriedly by the courtroom managers as the claimant awaits their floor to be opened. The curiosity is taking the air, filling it with seriousness and attention, the bench at last at alert. Oops! it seems that the claimant party is too impatient to get the floor as they are stopped in between from starting their submissions.
12:52 The bench has some last-minute friendly recommendations for the parties. Maybe the last fostering when they catch on their prey! Only time will tell.
12:54 The awaited time has begun. The claimant has taken on the floor, articulating their submission before the bench. She disperses composure yet nervousness. The argument has been embarked through its strong foothold on the memorial. The bench is all attentive and letting the ball get rolling. Initial queries have landed on the claimant’s dais.
12:58 The bench has noticed a pertinent contradiction in the speaker’s argument. The speaker seems confident but evidently loses her threshold on arguments. Frequent reference to memorials by the speaker which have dug up more questions by the bench.
13:01 The bench has noticed a pertinent contradiction in the speaker’s argument. The speaker seems confident but evidently loses her threshold on arguments. Frequent reference to memorials by the speaker which have dug up more questions by the bench.
13:04 Three minutes for the speaker to get her foothold strong. Inexplicably, she is demanding more queries from the bench as her summarization is done. Strong confidence indeed! The bench has got more on its platter which is bolstering the speaker’s appetite. No stutter but evident credence. The bench is all ears.
13:09 With her strong case, the first speaker has left the dais, giving way to the second speaker. Speaker two’s hold on the memorial is commendable as the bench is engaged in the sub-clauses, reading between the lines to get the speaker off-ground.
13:13 Oops! The speaker has at last been caught off-guard. Apologies flow from the speaker as the bench seems eager to go forward. They are continuing from the second limb of their argument, The respondent is all alert, discussing in between and noting the relevant points hurriedly.
13:17 The aura of the courtroom is at ease, however, the questions flow continuously. A very clever move by the speaker, dodging the question as she rests her claim on her client who is an abstract entity for this session. Great play indeed!
13:20 The reference to cases is giving the upper hand to the speaker as she is nearing the time limit of her submission. The submission seemed quite long as the courtroom manager slipped one paper to the speaker to conclude the submissions. The bench is ostentatiously oblivious to the time stamp.
13:25 Time’s Up now! However, the bench has gratuitously extended the claimant’s conclusion by a minute. They are running through their last shot to get some extra points. The bench has been welcoming for the claimant side but their faces give no hint of satisfaction or disdain. Only the marksheet will tell!
13:28 The floor has now been taken by the respondent party. He flatters a professional tone, keeping his composure and confidence intact. The bench has not been interrupted for now. Here is the first question from the bench as the silence has been broken now.
13:34 It seems that the claimant has caught on many points for rebuttals. Their hurried discussions with pens engrossing their papers indicate the same. The arbitrator has been displeased with one of the arguments by the speaker, followed by the feared “why” query from another arbitrator. “So, you are saying the agreement to sell survives?”, the questions continue.
13:44 The question is now on the facts of the case. As the second speaker hurriedly turns their memorial to satisfy the bench, they seems to be doing their job well enough. The flow of questions continues. The speaker is trying hard to escape the complexities as they assert her point with clear confidence.
13:49 No further questions have been put forward after the three questions for which the party has claimed ignorance for.
13:54 The claimant continues to ponder on the points for the upcoming rebuttal round. They pass frequent smiles as they pay their cumulative attention to sudden interruptions by the bench. The speaker again demands more time to answer the question, as the room is filled with deafening silence. She continues once again but alas for a mere half sentence. She has been interrupted once again!
13:59 The room is filled with more queries than answers which is furrowing for the speaker. The speaker seems overpowered with queries of the bench like a kettle outpouring with vapor pressure. They are doing their last limb with a quick summarization of the final shot as the court room manger flashes “Time’s Up”.
14:03 The bench now seeks parties to exit the courtroom, with no consideration for rebuttal rounds. The mark sheet paper has been drawn out for the arbitrators as they make their final minds about the parties’ fate. The expression of the bench and the length of queries have been evident but as they say “looks are deceptive”. Stay tuned to find out the results of the quarterfinals. Goodbye!
Court Room 2 : Jebel v. Blair
12:30 Day two of IMAM! The judges and participants look excited for yet another day of possibilities to show off their mooting skills! We eagerly await the respondents to join, as the judges engage in friendly conversation.
12:34 The room comes to life again as the respondents enter the room, everyone eager for the rounds to start.
12:37 AND GO! the rounds have started, with the claimants’ first speaker taking their place with their commanding voice. The speaker remains cool and collected, laying out their claims, holding utmost eye contact with the bench, never faltering.
12:40 The arbitrator asks for proof with a perplexed look on their face and yet the counsel calmly leads them to the respective page of the memorial, explaining themselves.
12:42 The arbitrators continue their line of interrogation and yet the counsel’s team looks more raffled than the speaker themselves. The claimant’s conviction seems to satisfy the arbitrator, as the argument proceeds.
12:46 The counsel leads the arbitrators through the structure of their speech, laying out the limbs of the argument clearly. However, it seems the speaker’s luck is running out as the arbitrators have confused looks on their faces, not following the claim being made.
12:53 The claimant drops yet another case law trying to sway the arbitrators into believing their line of reasoning. The arbitrators have no questions as time runs out and the second claimant gears up to take the floor.
12:55 It seems that all the speakers on this side of the counsel have voices of steel, as the second counsel commands the room with their voice, clearly demarcating the remaining submission they have.
12:58 Every question from the bench is met with a crystal clear explanation of the facts. The arbitrator will not have the counsel’s justifications, and reiterates the facts and the logical gaps.
13:02 “This goes against everything you have just said”, the arbitrators are ruthless with their judging as they do not led the counsel’s claims slide.
13:04 The counsel’s poised and cool demeanor is not on their side as the arbitrators still do not buy into their argument. They cite another case law, but still quite unable to be convincing due to a miniscule technicality.
13:09 The clock runs out but the arbitrators continue, “prove it if you can” they say with amused looks on their faces. The counsel is unable to exceed their time and the round comes to a close with a summary of the claimants’ contentions being reiterated.
13:12 “Thank you for your time” the counsel says trying to leave, but the arbitrator is not quite finished. The respondents are here! The first speaker enters the dais, documents in hand.
13:15 The respondent starts and is immediately interrupted by the arbitrator who asks question after question. The respondent is left speechless, struggling to come up with a response.
13:20 The respondent tries their best, desperately fishing for anything to say to substantiate their argument. They rifle through their documents, looking more perplexed than ever, nervous under the gaze of the bench.
13:23 The respondent regains composure, stating his argument without interruption from the arbitrators. The respondent walks back with great relief as their co-counsel takes the stage.
13:26 The second counsel appears more prepared, and more self-assured, easily answering the bench’s queries. The arbitrator frowns as the first counsel mouths something at the respondent speaker. Probably not a good response to get from the bench.
13:29 The claimant vigorously writes something down as the respondents’ argument progresses. The arbitrator provides a practical scenario which the counsel tries to justify.
13:37 An extension of one minute is allowed, but this round seems to remain unresolved as the arbitrators’ interrogation is not sufficiently clarified by the respondent. The claimants seem eager already to reclaim the podium as the clock runs out.
13:39 As the counsel ends their speech, they seem to collect themselves and lays out their argument clearly for the first and last time.
13:41 We are rejoined by the claimant for REBUTTALS! The claimant is scathing in the rebuttals, breaking down the crux of the respondents’ arguments.
13:42 Sur-rebuttals!! Eager to see what the respondents come up with as they try to rebut, which is met with bewilderment from the claimants.
13:44 We are finally at the end of the rounds! The participants sit with bated breath as the arbitrators get ready for their scores and feedback.
Court Room 3 : Busan v. Chabahar
12:38 Now, we are starting off with the much awaited final rounds of the prelims! The arbitrators are conversing as they wait for the participants to arrive. An air of tension and anticipation prevails in the room.
12:45 Madame Arbitrator asks the Counsel for the Claimant a question which he is able to answer confidently. The Bench listens, paying rapt attention to the arguments made! The discourse is gaining momentum as the counsel tries to substantiate and satisfy the arbitrator.
12:49 “Is there no case like this?” Madame Arbitrator asks as she seeks to understand the depth of understanding and the interpretation made by the Claimants of the problems and issues at hand. The Bench now carefully starts perusing the memos as the Claimant starts citing cases to provide a satisfactory answer.
12:53 Sir Arbitrator now provides a hypothetical situation to the Claimant; which he first seeks to understand and then answers patiently. And to his satisfaction, CORRECTLY! His Co-Counsels are trying to make sense of types of questions asked by the Bench.
12:58 TIME’S UP! Card is up in the air. But the Claimant seeks an extension so as to complete his arguments which is approved by the Bench as they start firing him with a salvo of questions!
13:02 There seems to be a deadlock as the Bench is providing the Claimant with an entirely different and contrary hypothesis which completely weakens their case. The Counsel for the Claimant very cleverly and persistently strives to defend their position.
13:04 TIME’S UP! Card is up again but it seems that the Bench is oblivious to the fact. The Bench seems to be in a very good and engaging mood today as it continues with their barrage of questions.
13:07 The Co-Counsel for the Claimant starts with his arguments. His speed is significantly greater than that of the previous speaker as he is well aware of the paucity of time; with more time being spent previously by the first speaker He aims to finish arguing all their issues well on time.
13:10 The Bench engages him in a loop of questions which he tries to answer effectively. Madam Arbitrator asks him “Which case? Which authority?” the Claimant momentarily stutters while answering the same. But they are able to regain their flow of arguments as Madam Arbitrator helps them regain his footing. They seem to have answered her questions satisfactorily with the Bench nodding in agreement.
13:19 Sir Arbitrator observes, “You are confusing yourself counsel more than you are confusing us.” leaving the counsel confused about their flow of arguments.
13:22 TIMES UP! Card is put up by the CRMs but the saga of questions and answers continues! The Claimant apologizes to the Bench as their argument does not seem to translate effectively. The Bench provides them time to move on with their next issue.
13:26 Hereafter, we start with the Respondents submissions! The counsel for the respondents is a bit nervous. Madame Arbitrator asks, “Where does your right flow from in this case?”
13:38 “Why are you armtwisting a party which didn’t have the obligation to pay you?” – Comes another question from the Bench as they seem slightly flustered with their arguments.
13:42 The respondent seeks to complete her submissions. But ALAS! TIME’S UP! says the placard up in the air. The Bench is entirely oblivious to this fact. Their bag of questions seem to be unending today! After a few minutes of question answering back and forth, the Bench provides the Counsel permission to conclude their arguments.
13:46 The Co-Counsel for the Respondent starts with their submissions. The Bench starts asking him the meaning of a specific clause which he is able to reply successfully. Gradually his nervousness seems to disappear as he regains his confidence. Sir Arbitrator, seeks to confuse them by asking them a question, but they are careful enough to not fall into this trap.
13:50 “How do you do agency here?” Madame Arbitrator seeks a clarification as she seeks proof of a valid agency. The respondent argues that “It is implied in the proposition”. To this, Madame Arbitrator replies; “The question I am asking is legal – not factual in nature.”. An interesting exchange takes place after which the respondents seek some time to figure out the answer to the question put forward.
13:58 “Basically, you have taken a shortcut.” – Sir Arbitrator exclaims as he notices a significant difference in the respondents memo submissions. The Bench then asks the respondent to complete their submissions. A roll of laughter arises in the Bench as the respondent isnt fully confident and aware of the contents of a specific article. The Bench is surprised to note that the counsel for the respondent is not completely aware about an argument made in their own memo.
14:02 Now we start with the penultimate stage- the Sur-Rebuttals; the claimants effectively rebut the “Himalaya Clause” which wasn’t properly argued by the counsel for the respondents. “One man’s weakness is another man’s strength!” – this proverb seems very appropriate as the Counsel for the Claimants fully use the opportunity provided to them. The Bench is pretty impressed as they successfully navigate past a trick question.
14:07 And with this, this session comes to an end! The teams have been asked to evacuate the courtroom as the arbitrators engage in a fruitful discourse on the teams’ performances and start marking the score sheets.
Court Room 4 : Rotterdam v. Bremen
12:30 Welcome back to the 2nd day of 11th IMAM 2024! The weather is sunny and hot here and so is the courtroom as the arbitrators are all set for the last Qualifying rounds.
12:33 The Counsel No. 1 for the claimant has already approached the dais and is preparing for start of the rounds. The Respondents sides are prepared too with their pen and notes as their intent is to aim and save more time for rebuttals.
12:39 The bench continues to follow the submissions of the counsel as there is little intervention from the former’s side.
12:41 The CRMs have raised the time stamp as we move to the last 5 minutes of the counsel. The Bench seems to be following the counsel as the counsel makes a reference to the written submissions.
12:47 The counsel seems to be convincing the bench as a time extension has been granted to the counsel to summarize the arguments. The counsel asking for a further 30 sec extension, quickly summarizes the arguments.
12:49 The counsel no. 2 has took over the dais and starts with the submissions of two issues. The bench in a very focused view continues to hear the counsel’s pleadings.
12:54 The Bench asks for clarification of a particular point as they ask the counsel to refer to the written memo. The counsel takes a pause, maintains her calm and explains the clarification asked.
13:00 Last 3 minutes left for the claimant’s side and the arbitrator raises a fundamental question before the counsel. The counsel refers to the documents and replies to the query, the bench doesn’t seem to be fully convinced.
13:13 A huge extension of 10 minutes becomes interesting as the bench asks for case laws to support the answers put forward by the counsel.
13:19 The 15 minutes extension has turned to be fruitful as the bench seems convinced. The counsel very smooothly concludes their submissions.
13:27 The Counsel for the respondents has approached the dais and the bench in a joyous mood interacts before the counsel begins with the submissions.
13:40 The Counsel seems to have convinced the bench as he quickly sums up his arguments and concludes.
13:50 The counsel no. 2 now continues with other issues of the case. The bench keeps questioning for clarifications or queries at interval as the last session goes on a smooth pace.
13:55 Audience! The moment has come! The bench takes on the counsel as they find a substantive point to ask. This basically is what is called grilling. The counsel takes a pause, recollects his arguments and presents the answer. The Bench seems to be convinced.
14:02 The claimants counsel is not in a mood to lose as they present a rebuttal which seems to have been acknowledged by the bench in a positive manner.
14:03 A same spirit is noticed from the respondent’s side too as they present a energetic surrebuttal before the bench.
14:05 The session has started concluding. Both the teams seem curious about how their rounds went. The Bench marking the scoresheets seems to be escalating the curiosity of the teams.
14:06 The Bench provides the feedback to the teams, pointing where there was scope for improvement and guiding how some changes can be made. This marks the end of the Qualifying Rounds. Stay tuned to see who makes it to the quarter-finals!
Court Room 5 : Hamburg v. Antwerp
12:46 As the Arbitrators engage in conversation among themselves, the teams begin to enter the room, their anticipation palpable as they prepare for the round to commence, hope shining brightly in their eyes.
12:51 Just 2 minutes into the round, the Arbitrators launch into their questioning. Suddenly, a probing query leaves the Claimant momentarily silent, before they gather their thoughts and deliver a response.
12:57 With just 3 minutes remaining before the Claimants’ time expires, they’re giving their all to sway the Arbitrators’ confidence. Yet, the question remains: will their efforts be sufficient? We shall find out soon enough!
13:01 It’s now time for Claimant 2 to continue the arguments, aiming to bolster their case further. As things stand, the Arbitrators don’t seem as convinced as the Claimants would hope. Claimant 2 has allocated 18 minutes on the clock for their presentation, and it remains to be seen where this time will take them.
13:08 The Arbitrators nod, their expressions reflecting a mixture of intrigue and partial agreement, as the Claimant responds to one of their questions. The Arbitrators instruct the Claimant to continue further with their argument as time on the clock is running out quickly.
13:17 With just one minute remaining, the Arbitrators maintain their poker faces, revealing no hint of being convinced. Undeterred, the Claimant persists in their efforts, striving with all their might to make their case.
13:20 The room resonates with the bold voice of the Respondent as they proceed with their arguments. However, not even a minute in, the Arbitrators have already begun their questioning, setting the stage for a rapid-fire exchange of ideas.
13:25 In the midst of challenging questioning, the Respondent’s team extends a lifeline representing a beacon in the dark. Armed with this assistance, the respondent answers the question. Yet, their response acts as a double-edged sword, inviting further probing from the Arbitrators.
13:27 With just 2 minutes remaining on the clock, the Respondent concludes their arguments with a polite “thank you.” However, before they can fully wrap up, the Arbitrators, with numerous queries swirling in their minds, halt them to delve into further questioning.
13:37 Disagreement arises between the co-counsels of the Respondents’ team regarding facts, causing confusion and raising additional questions in the minds of the Arbitrators. This uncertainty is evident on the Arbitrators’ faces, reflecting their growing concern.
13:45 Just 2 minutes remaining and the Arbitrators pose a hypothetical question to test the Respondent’s knowledge. Their lack of conviction is evident, casting doubt on the strength of the Respondents’ case. Will the remaining time suffice to sway the Arbitrators in their favor?
13:51 As rebuttals draw to a close, the arbitrators appear impartial, with neither team clearly winning their favor. Like referees after a closely contested match, they now transition to offering general feedback, signaling the end of this round.
Court Room 6 : Jeddah v. Colombo
12:48 Good afternoon and welcome to the final session of the prelims!. The stakes are high, the courtroom is set, and let’s begin.
12:53 The Claimant begins, neatly introducing their argument break up. They’re immediately stopped by the Arbitrator who points out that they are using an argument forgotten from her written submissions. The Claimant tries their (level) best to convince the Arbitrator that it is an argument emerging from her written submissions, finally conceding.
13:00 “No, we will come back to that later.” With 3 minutes to go, the Arbitrators have completely deviated the Claimant from her submissions to question her on one particular point. Will the Claimant be able to lead the Arbitrator back to her argument?
13:07 With the Claimant’s submissions (also the time) over, the arbitrator asks her to briefly reiterate her arguments. It seems that even with 13 minutes of time, the Claimant couldn’t make the journey from the dias to the bench.
13:15 “Choose your words properly, what do you mean “makes sense”?” The arbitrator’s annoyance is stinging to the Claimant (and to their team by association), who is left stuttering at the dias.
13:20 The Claimant is being grilled by the Arbitrators, and then comes to the rescue a pigeon (the court room manager) with a letter from the high seas (a note from her teammate). It seems that the Claimant doesn’t speak the language of the high seas, because they still could not answer.
13:29 The Claimant abandons ship, as they hold up a stance contrary to what her co-counsel had upheld. The researcher frantically scribbles on a sheet of paper but no note reaches the dais.
13:38 The Respondent begins their pleadings with a synopsis of the facts and then going to the issues. They seems unreceptive to the tenor of the room, as they merrily keep pleading while the bemused Arbitrators sit in silence.
13:55 The co-Respondent begins, their manner is engaging and confident. They move without any delay to the pleadings. The Arbitrators seem much more engaged, all looking at the Claimant.
14:04 The Arbitrator and the Respondent are in a disagreement over a matter of fact, with the Arbitrator grilling the Respondent, and them refusing to answer the question presented.
14:09 “I am repeating this for the last time.” is something one doesn’t want to hear from the person who holds your fate in their hand. Unfortunately he Respondent had to hear it from the arbitrator.
14:13 The Rebuttals begin! The Claimant poses a question that exposes a loop hole in the Respondent’s argument. One only needs to see the arbitrator’s approving expression to know they’ve made a good point.
14:15 The Respondents rebut confidently, but it doesn’t seem to have convinced the arbitrators as much as the initial rebuttals from the claimants did.The feedback session begins. The arbitrators adopt a unique approach and ask the participants to give their feedback on the arbitrators first. The Respondents as well as the Claimants appreciated how the arbitrators heard them out completely.
14:16 The feedback session begins. The arbitrators adopt a unique approach and ask the participants to give their feedback on the arbitrators first. The Respondents as well as the Claimants appreciated how the arbitrators heard them out completely.
14:19 “Your arguments were bulletproof” is the one of the best compliments a mooter can get. The Respondent got it, if only it wasn’t for the “but only because the facts of the case were tilted in your favour” that followed. With that, the prelims come to an end. We are all eager to know who makes it to the quarters. Stay tuned!
Court Room 7 : Vancouver v. Klang
12:27 Welcome to the second day of the preliminary rounds of the 11th NLUO Bose & Mitra & Co. International Maritime Arbitration Moot 2024! The energy in the courtroom is palpable as one of the team leaves after their rounds and the other one gears up for the same.
12:29 Taking the platform now is the Claimants’ first speaker. As they list the issues they will be addressing today, the speaker sounds assured and confident
12:35 The speaker seems to be cruising through their speech quite smoothly and with unwavering firmness. The Arbitrators are carefully contemplating each point made by the speaker.
12:37 The second speaker enters the podium, posts the necessary permissions, and begins with their submission. They indicate that they will be focusing on two issues
12:40 The first question comes up. A lengthy response to a concise query about the Bill of Lading. The speaker remains staunch on their case and judges seem to be pleased by the arguments being put forth.
12:44 The speaker is met with a brisk round of questions by one of the arbitrators, but this does not dislodge the confidence in the speaker’s answers. The energy seems to be lively in the courtroom as the speaker is not taking a moment’s break before addressing the queries posed by the inquisitive Arbitrators.
12:51 The Arbitrators call upon the speaker to substantiate their arguments with a judgment which the speaker fails to provide. They further pose questions regarding the clauses being mentioned and the speaker retorts to them with an unbridled certainty.
12:58 The second speaker is interacting with the arbitrators again as they provide them with a couple of paragraphs from the judgment that was inquired about earlier in their speech.
13:03 The second speaker takes the podium yet again as the arbitrators stipulate their further queries. The speaker points out a fallacy in the documents provided by the respondents, who are nowhere around the proximity of the courtroom.
13:05 “Just because there are mistakes in the arguments of the Respondents does not mean that we will not give weightage to their arguments”, says one of the Arbitrators as the speaker points out a list of errors and typos in the Respondents’ submissions.
13:10 The second speaker departs the podium and the Arbitrators engage in a conversation amongst themselves. They proceed to interact with the team present in the courtroom.
13:15 After a fruitful conversation between the arbitrators and the team, the round comes to an end. The arbitrators ask the team to move out so that they can ensure confidentiality while handing over the score-sheets.
Court Room 8 : Savannah v. Mundra
12:49 The participants stride into the room radiating confidence. Despite the Claimants appearing fatigued from their immediately preceding SOS round, they’ve made an admirable initial showing.
12:57 The Arbitrators meticulously examine the written submissions of the Claimants, skillfully correlating them with the oral arguments presented. Their discerning gaze catches a contradiction within the oral submissions, aligning it with the facts of the case, and highlighting it with precision.
13:03 As the Arbitrators pose questions rooted in legal principles, the Claimant scrambles to provide answers, resorting to consulting a note as the clock ticks down to the final minute. It’s a race against time as they strive to articulate their responses with clarity and coherence before the time runs out.
13:11 The Arbitrators attempt to sow confusion by highlighting contradictions, aiming to catch the Claimant speaker off guard. However, the speaker demonstrates thorough preparation and remains unfazed, adeptly addressing each challenge thrown their way.
13:16 The Claimant modestly presents their arguments before the Bench, skillfully directing the their attention to the comprehensive compendium they have submitted. Their submissions present preparedness and organization, impressing the Arbitrators who appear pleased with the Claimant’s presentation.
13:19 With just one minute left on the clock, the Arbitrators abruptly inquire about the foundation of their submissions. The Claimant requests time to gather themselves and try to answer the questions posed.
13:24 While the Speaker confidently advances through their submissions and adeptly responds to the arbitrators’ questions, the rest of the Respondent team appears anxious, their legs trembling and lips bitten in nervousness.
13:30 As the last minute ticks away, a back-and-forth ensues between the Tribunal and the Respondent. Despite the speaker’s confidence, they have faltered in managing their time effectively, resulting in a delay in their submissions.
13:33 Even though time has expired, the back-and-forth exchange persists as the Arbitrators press for a simple answer based on the facts, leaving the speaker visibly puzzled.
13:38 The Respondent appears hesitant during their submissions, with their team engaged in quiet discussions on the bench. As the Arbitrators inquire about the contractual obligations of the Respondent, the speaker gains confidence swiftly, promptly referring the tribunal to the relevant clauses in the agreement.
13:46 Last five minutes remain on the clock, the Respondent stands firm at the helm, steering their case with precision amidst the crashing waves of opposing arguments. Much like a seasoned captain adjusting sails to catch the wind, they adeptly counter each contention raised by the Claimants, charting a course towards a favorable outcome.
13:50 Even though time has expired, the back-and-forth exchange persists as the Arbitrators press for a simple answer based on the facts, leaving the speaker visibly puzzled.
13:58 As the Respondents undergo sur-rebuttals, the arbitrators’ direct clarifications towards the seated claimants. Confident in their stance, the Claimants appear composed, while the Respondents find themselves in trouble under the intense scrutiny of the tribunal.
14:00 The rounds are concluded as the speakers leave the room, giving some time to the Arbitrators for scoring and gathering feedback.
DAY 2 | 16TH MARCH 2024
PRELIMINARY ROUNDS – SESSION 5
CONCLUDES!
Day 2 | 16th March 2024
QUARTER-FINAL ROUNDS
QF 1 : Santos v. Busan
16:59 Good Evening and welcome to the Quarter Final rounds! The arbitrators have arrived early and are discussing amongst themselves ways to test the participants to the maximum. It’s going to be a tough ride!
17:07 The arbitrators are ready as they request for the participants to be sent in. But where are the teams? Perhaps enjoying an evening stroll in the pleasant coastal weather.
17:11 The wait comes to an end as both the teams arrive. They look well-prepared and confident. The scoresheets have been handed to the arbitrators, the fate of the participants is now quite literally in their hands. Let the mooting begin!
17:16 The claimant approaches the dais, and the arbitrator asks them to start but then immediately interrupts and questions them on the jurisdiction of the tribunal, they answer confidently, but that isn’t enough for the arbitrator who keeps probing on the same matter.
17:22 The Claimant was not permitted to present their arguments, interrupted by the questions of the arbitrators. “This is not your statement of facts, this is your statement of claims.” The arbitrators are not very convinced with the claimant’s submissions.
17:26 “He is the presiding officer, you will refer to him as the president, not arbitrator.” The arbitrators are testing the Claimant, ensuring that only the best make it to the Semi-Finals.
17:34 The arbitrators will not be satisfied with a case law from 1984. If the Claimant wants to prove the existence of the contract, they will have to try harder.
17:37 As the Claimant’s time comes to an end, they ask for some more time to summarize their arguments. The arbitrators are willing to spare one minute for her submissions.
17:40 The co-Claimant now takes over the dais, and the bench grows cold for a moment. But they aren’t immune to the zeal of the Quarter Finals either, as they commence their questions less than a minute into the pleadings.
17:47 The President is the presiding arbitrator for a reason. He is not letting any discrepancy in the Claimant’s arguments slip. The Claimant is as calm as the President is meticulous.
17:49 The Claimant makes a brave attempt of trying to convince the arbitrators on their point using an e-mail analogy. It musn’t have been good enough because the president promptly replied “No, we don’t accept your analogy.”
17:56 The arbitrators have pushed the Claimant into a trap of their own making. A fine understanding of the agreement, and the effect of each clause is imperative if you wish to avoid the Claimant’s fate!
18:00 “Show us an exact authority of the English courts that say ….”. The arbitrators won’t leave any stone unturned, and any claim unsubstantiated.
18:03 There is silence in the courtroom, a rare sight to see! The arbitrators are all looking down, “You, please continue”, says the President but the Claimant appears too baffled to speak.
18:09 The Claimant finishes her submissions with a summary of their arguments. The arbitrators promptly ask the court room managers about the extra time that was given to the Claimants. “Six minute thirty seconds.” comes the reply, “the Respondents shall receive the same, and not a minute more.”
18:12 The atmosphere of the courtroom is intense. The Respondent has begun his submissions in a confident (and rather loud) voice, the arbitrators listen intently.
18:19 The president poses a question regarding the contract between the parties. Ooooh! The Respondent appears unsure as he asks the president to repeat his question.
18:22 “All three judgments you’re citing, can you quote-unquote tell us what part you are using from them.” The Respondent carefully evades from answering this and the arbitrators move on.
18:27 All three arbitrators are grilling the Respondent on the interchangeability of certain legal terms. The Respondent is calmly putting forth their point. It seems that the arbitrators’ stratagems have no effect on them.
18:33 “They are concerned with Chennai to Singapore, they are not concerned with you.” The President does not mince his words, “They are concerned with my ..” The Respondent does not plan to back out without putting up a fight.
18:36 “You’re only pleading, but where is your evidence?” “There is no evidence.” “Why would we take your claims without evidence?” The courtroom is heating up as the arbitrators engage in a war of words with the Respondent.
18:39 The co-Respondent approaches the dais and begins his pleadings, stuttering a bit initially. Having witnessed the treatment of those who came before them, the Respondent appears positively intimidated.
18:54 With only three and a half minutes left, the arbitrators are continuing grilling the Respondent. The Respondent is hurling back replies, coherent or otherwise.
19:00 The Respondent finishes his submissions. Now it is the time for rebuttals, the final chance to impress the arbitrators and make it to the Semi-Finals!
19:05 The rebuttals are going through without much interruption from the bench that has suddenly turned cold. Have their minds already been made?
19:08 With the rebuttals completed, this session comes to a close. The arbitrators will now deliberate upon the fate of the participants, may the best mooter win!
QF 2 : Paradeep v. Jebel
17:39 The arbitrator wishes the participants well before the beginning of the arguments. The participants’ faces flash with a bit of nervousness, quickly being morphed back to confidence.
17:42 The bench has signaled the claimant to begin. They start off strong, beginning to place their claims. The bench has also begun with the questioning, asking for clarification on the basis on which the subsequent arguments are being placed.
17:45 The teamwork is strong here. The claimants have begun aiding their speaker.
17:50 The bench continues asking for clarifications. The claimant is unfettered, pointing to paragraphs which support their case. The bench is temporarily satisfied. Spoken too soon! There seems to be a conflict of facts between the claimant and the bench.
17:55 The bench listens to the arguments made intently and so do the respondents. We are yet to see how they plan to upturn their claims.
18:02 The bench confers on the validity of the claims asking for more clarifications as the claimant begins with the next issue on the plate.
18:04 “Is this a claim in tort or in contract?” The bench questions the basic concepts of the claimants. The claimant quickly answers and summarizes their arguments as they ask for an extension to their time.
18:08 The co-claimant takes over, furthering their contentions before the bench. The bench begins with their queries, questioning the content of the arguments put forth by the claimants.
18:13 Cases are being cited in abundance. The bench questions their relevance and how the claims and the cases align. The claimant confidently answers and explains.
18:15 The claimant expertly navigates their ship of arguments, with the goal of reaching the port safely as the storm of questions continues.
18:27 The claimant uses their dwindling time to lay forth their prayer infront of the bench, thus ending their submissions.
18:30 The bench allows the respondent to approach and begin with their arguments. The respondent starts off strong, confidence ringing in their voice.
18:34 The questioning has begun. The respondent answers unwavering, confident in their argument. The bench retaliates with another question, starting a sizzling back and forth. The bench questions the facts and the actions of the respondents.
18:37 The arbitrators peruse the documents, not letting anything slip by. No fact goes unquestioned. The bench asks for further backing and evidence. The respondent does not disappoint, persuasive in their claim.
18:40 It is a hot bench indeed, firing questions one after another but the respondent stands strong, confident in their claims, backing their arguments with a plethora of evidence.
18:46 The bench does not seem to let up. The respondent brings out cases as their shield. The claimants too listen intently, taking note of the arguments made by the respondent.
18:49 The bench asks the respondent about customary practices, testing their basics, keen to ascertain the merit of the arguments.
18:50 “Why should they pay again?” the bench asks the respondent questioning the fairness of the respondent’s actions. The respondent answers the query satisfactorily, bringing their arguments to a close as the co-respondent takes over.
18:58 The respondent takes the aid of specific sections of acts and cites case laws, walking the bench through their argument while backing their claims. The bench seems unsatisfied thereby asking for clarifications.
19:04 The bench goes through the claims presented with a fine-toothed comb. The respondent asserts their claim by referring the bench to the facts of the case, pointing to the actions of both parties
19:10 The respondent backs their claims with documentary evidence. The bench further queries about their expectations from the arbitration.
19:13 Time runs out with respondent in the middle of an argument. The bench grants an extension, asking a few more questions to clarify the claims of the respondents.
19:15 The crickets never got a chance to have their chirping heard. The participants answered each question put forward by the bench, not faltering in the face of any query thrown at them.
19:17 Using the rebutals to their advantage, the claimants put forth their claims with greater conviction. The bench does not seem convinced, throwing another question at the claimant. The speaker refuses to back down and explains why their arguments must be considered as valid.
19:24 The respondent persuades the bench through sur-rebuttals to witness the validity of their case. They seem to be building their case back with confidence.
19:28 The round ends on a high with smiles on everyone’s faces. Relief threads through the participants at a round well done. Stay tuned as we eagerly await to see the results of the Quarters. Will we see these teams in Semis? Only the scoresheet will tell! Until then, good night.
QF 3 : Hamburg v. Rotterdam
17:14 Welcome to the quarter-finals of the 11th Bose and Mitra International Maritime Arbitration Moot, the atmosphere hums with palpable excitement, the stakes higher than ever before. The bench is eager to witness the clash of legal titans unfold before their eyes.
17:27 The courtroom lies in a stillness, akin to a dormant battlefield awaiting the clash of contenders. With the absence of the teams, each moment is stretching like a taut bowstring. We are waiting for the moment when the silence will be shattered by the arrival of the teams.
17:33 With a sense of purpose the claimants finally arrive, their demeanor exudes focused determination as they meticulously review their memo, preparing to present their case with precision and care.
17:39 With a resolute opening, the counsel for the claimant unveils their submissions directly like a well-tailored suit. The true measure of their preparedness lies not in the boldness of their presentation, but in their ability to convince the bench.
17:44 As the Bench poses a probing question regarding the facts of a cited case and the choice of citing older case laws over more recent ones, a ripple of anticipation courses through the Courtroom. The query serves as a litmus test of the Claimant’s legal acumen and strategic reasoning.
17:47 As the counsel grapples with the absence of a supporting judgment, the bench inquires about the presence of a researcher in the Claimant team, who is not here. The promise to revisit the issue serves as a stern reminder that the bench will not overlook any detail.
17:52 As the bench questions the Claimants about the use of “verbal manipulation” by the Claimant, the room holds its breath. Will the Claimants justify their tactics with legal principles, or will this term be seen as mere linguistic choice by the Bench.
17:57 With a minute still on the clock, the counsel concludes their submission. However, the Bench seizes the opportunity to seek clarification on the bill of lading before allowing them to depart.
18:00 As the co-counsel takes the dais, a brief moment of silence hangs in the air before they begin. Once they delve into the discussion of the second issue, their demeanour exudes calmness and confidence.
18:03 With a keen eye for detail, the bench probes the significance of the term “untouched,” leaving no stone unturned in their quest for clarity, challenging the counsel to articulate the nuanced implications of their language choices in the context of the case at hand.
18:07 “Okay counsel I will stop you here, lets go back to the basic principal of contracts” asks one Arbitrator. It’s evident that they’ve identified a potential flaw in the argument. Now, the counsel stands at a crossroads: will they justify their position convincingly and evade the perceived flaw, or will they falter under the scrutiny of the Bench?
18:09 With a subtle nod and unwavering eye contact, the co-counsel confidently navigates the barrage of questions hurled by the Bench.
18:18 As the counsel invokes the concept of an implied contract between the involved parties, the bench probes for a supporting case law. This time, however, the co-counsel is prepared, swiftly producing the relevant precedent. In this pivotal moment, the courtroom witnesses the co-counsel’s adept handling of the inquiry, solidifying their credibility and fortifying their stance in the ongoing legal discourse.
18:23 “I agree, but…” begins the arbitrator, their words hinting at a reluctance to fully embrace the counsel’s argument. This suggests that while they may acknowledge certain points, there are also putting forth reservations or counterarguments that need to be addressed.
18:25 Delving into their final argument, the co-counsel meticulously constructs their case regarding the goods in the godown, strategically leveraging relevant clauses to bolster their position. In this crucial juncture, their ability to articulate a compelling argument may prove decisive in swaying the tribunal’s opinion.
18:27 As the respondent’s counsel approaches the dais, their teammates offer words of encouragement, wishing them success in their endeavor. Will the respondents successfully establish their case? Are we about to witness a legal masterpiece or just another episode of courtroom calamity.
18:31 Following an inquiry about timestamps, the counsel for the respondent acknowledges the submissions made by the claimant, demonstrating a keen understanding of the case at hand. With precision and clarity, they articulate their strategy for approaching their own submission, laying out a structured plan of action.
18:35 With confidence radiating from their demeanor, the counsel for the respondent directs the bench’s attention to a specific point in their memo. Their assertive yet composed delivery commands the attention of the bench, compelling them to focus intently on the highlighted aspect of their argument.
18:40 “My interpretation of the clause is…” begins the arbitrator, presenting what appears to be a challenging question. However, the counsel responds swiftly and confidently, offering an answer that addresses the inquiry with ease. The expression of the bench does not give us a clue about whether they are convinced or not.
18:50 Redirecting the question regarding the clause to their co-counsel, the counsel swiftly acknowledges the constraints of time, hurriedly distilling their arguments into concise summaries. Their voice resonates through the courtroom with urgency, they strive to convey their key points with clarity and efficiency, hoping to make a lasting impression on the Arbitrators before time runs out.
18:55 As the counsel graciously thanks the bench and leaves the dais, the co-counsel steps forward with confidence, seamlessly picking up the baton. With conviction in their voice, they assert a crucial point regarding the physical possession of the bill of lading in their submission. Their words resonate with authority, commanding the attention of the bench.
19:00 “Let me put you in the shoes of my client” says the co counsel, noting that the bench will not accept anything without thorough interrogation, is the co counsel prepared well to face each question head-on with diligence and determination?
19:08 “I appreciate that, and I agree with you,” acknowledges the Arbitrator. This moment could indeed mark a turning point in the battle, signaling alignment with the Respondent’s argument. However, the Claimants still have the opportunity to sway the tide in their favor during the rebuttals.
19:11 “Is the tribunal with me?” repeats the co-counsel, their voice steady as they guide the bench to a specific paragraph in their memo. Evidently determined to maintain the tribunal’s attention, they exude confidence in their presentation. Indeed, their efforts have not gone unnoticed, as they successfully capture and retain the tribunal’s focus.
19:14 As the researcher passes a chit to the co-counsel through the courtroom managers, a glimmer of hope emerges. With this newfound information in hand, the co-counsel might indeed be possessing the key to turning the tide in their favor.
19:16 Confidently, the co-counsel asks, “Do I sense a question, Mr. Arbitrator?” Their tone carries a hint of amusement, subtly nudging the bench to engage further. In this playful exchange, they assert their readiness to tackle any queries thrown their way.
19:19 With a plea for just one more minute, the co-counsel seizes the opportunity. Like a conductor orchestrating the final notes of a symphony, they weave together the threads of their submission with precision and clarity.
19:21 As the clock ticks past the allotted time, the bench extends a gracious invitation to the co-counsel: “Anything further to add?” Undeterred by the passage of time, the co-counsel, with a confident smile, acknowledges that they’ve presented the essence of their submission. Yet, unable to resist the opportunity to delve deeper, they embark on a detailed explanation, unravelling intricacies and reinforcing key points.
19:25 As the counsel for the claimant step into the arena for their rebuttal, the courtroom holds its breath, awaiting the climactic showdown. Will they seize this opportunity to turn the tide in their favor with razor-sharp arguments and strategic rebuttals? Or will they falter under the pressure, forfeiting their chance to sway the arbiters’ opinions? A hint of nervousness is palpable as the claimants embark on their rebuttal.
19:28 With precision and resolve, the counsel for the respondent dives into their sur-rebuttals, methodically addressing each of the three arguments put forth by the claimants. Like a skilled tactician surveying the battlefield, they strategize their counterattacks, aiming to dismantle the foundation of their opponents’ case.
19:31 As the round concludes and the teams are asked to leave the room, anticipation lingers in the air, with the question of victory hanging heavy on everyone’s minds. The bench is deliberating over the merits of each presentation. Will it be the claimants, who fought tirelessly to assert their case? Or will victory belong to the respondents, who skilfully defended against every challenge thrown their way?
QF 4 : Vancouver v. Savannah
16:45 Greetings Everyone! With great enthusiasm, we embark upon the Quarterfinals of the 11th Bose & Mitra Co. International Arbitration Moot (IMAM), NLUO while the sun sets over the Naraj Dam. Having successfully navigated through the intense competition, the teams are eager to kick off the Quarterfinal rounds bright and early. We eagerly await the arrival of the Respected Arbitrators.
16:58 The Arbitrators have arrived and there is a look of nervousness and anticipation on the faces of Vancouver and Savannah. As the final formalities are swiftly attended to, the stage is set for the commencement of the rounds, with the Claimants gathering their papers and making their way towards the dais.
17:02 Drawing from their past experiences in the competition, the claimant confidently presents their three-pronged approach. With keen eyes, the arbitrators swiftly pinpoint clauses pertaining to matters of jurisdiction within the statements.
17:06 Is answering “Yes, Mr. Arbitrator ” to every statement too early to give in, or is it a wise move based on the agreement’s commercial viability and good faith? The Claimant attempts to answer these questions by highlighting their written submissions and compendiums, showing preparedness for the Quarter Final rounds.
17:12 As the arbitrator delves into the clauses concerning the endorsement of the bill of lading, they direct their inquiry to the speaker, prompting for clarifications. Sensing the need for a moment to gather thoughts, the Claimant requests a brief pause, casting an eager glance at their off-counsel for support. They further proceed with their last argument while last three minutes remain on the clock.
17:19 As the first claimant speaker wraps up their arguments, their co-counsel steps forward to the podium. In a silent exchange of glances, they acknowledge the collective effort that has brought them to this pivotal moment. The second speaker outlines the structure of their argument, all while the arbitrators attentively scrutinize the memorials submitted.
17:25 The Arbitrators have a smile on their faces when they probe the Claimants with preliminary maritime law questions. The Claimant seeks the Tribunal’s attention every two minutes, while they keenly listen to the oral submissions.
17:31 The Arbitrators primarily focus on the basics of contractual obligations, posing questions that challenge the foundation of the claims presented. They assert that the proposed claims appear to be fundamentally flawed, prompting the Claimants to carefully reconsider their arguments.
17:36 As the Claimant supports their arguments with case laws, the arbitrators raise a critical question about the viability of relying on ancient precedents that have not been invoked by the tribunal previously. This prompts the Claimant to reassess the strategic use of historical case laws in their presentation.
17:42 As the arbitrator challenges the validity of the Claimants’ existing arguments based on customary practice, they prompt for an alternative. Undeterred, the Speaker delves deep into the facts, meticulously substantiating their arguments with logic rather than relying solely on precedent. With just five minutes remaining on the clock, they craft a compelling case grounded in reason and evidence.
17:46 It’s Times Up! The Claimant proceeds with their prayers while having missed out on their last submissions. The Respondent seeks to approach the dais, being confident that their case holds ground.
17:50 The Arbitrators wear expressions of surprise as the Respondent emphasizes their submissions, seemingly catching them off guard. Despite the weariness evident in the team, they remain steadfast. Off-counsels diligently send notes to assist the Respondent, who presses on with determination.
17:57 The Respondent directs the panels attention towards the Charter party, and a landmark case law cited by them. The Arbitrators seem satisfied so far, however, only time will tell who takes away the case as both sides are going strong in their preparedness and swift answering. The last 10 minutes remain on the clock.
18:05 The off-counsel passes numerous notes to the speaker as the Arbitrators pose questions on the valuation of cargo, momentarily confusing the speaker about their own claims of loss and damages. The nervousness seems to be apparent as the Respondent shakily flips through the papers in front of them, as they have only two minutes left for their submissions.
18:11 The second speaker of the Respondent approaches the dais as the team engages in a discussion of the submissions presented so far. They assemble their papers and begin with their submission with a smile of confidence on their face.
18:22 Like silence before the storm, the Arbitrators have now started a fiery line of questioning, making an attempt to falter the speaker in their submissions. However, the Respondent swiftly navigates through the questions and moves forward to its second submission. The speaker seems to have a grasp over time and is able to manage themselves in an appealing manner to the court.
18:27 Having 5 minutes on the clock, the Respondent seeks to proceed forward with the prayers, giving ample time to the Arbitrators to seek clarifications from the Respondent to assess their knowledge.
18:31 The court room directs their undivided attention towards the Respondent as the line of questioning continues. Time’s up, yet the back-and-forth continues akin to a seastorm.
18:34 Respondents take a seat after being able to answer the questions posed to them. The Claimant now begins with their rebuttals by dismissing the case laws cited by their opponents. Only time will tell what shall satisfy the knowledgeable Abitrators. Having only two minutes for their rebuttals, they succinctly put forth their submissions.
18:38 The Respondents have three minutes for sur-rebuttals, and take time to assemble their papers. After approaching the dais, the proceed to argue purely on logic and substance of the facts. They seem to have missed out on reference of case laws made by the Claimants.
18:40 As the curtains fall on the Quarterfinal rounds between Vancouver and Savannah, the teams step out of the courtroom, their adrenaline still pulsing from the intense battle of wits. Behind closed doors, the judges meticulously jot down scores, preparing to deliver insightful feedback that will shape the trajectory of the competition.
Day 2 | 16th March 2024
QUARTER-FINAL ROUNDS
CONCLUDE!
Day 3 | 17th March 2024
SEMI-FINAL ROUNDS
SF 1 : Santos v. Savannah
09:55 Welcome to Day 3! The Semi-Finale episode of this season of IMAM is about to unfold. Buckle up, for more drama and plot twists for this sure is going to be rollercoaster ride!
10:05 The Claimants have approached the dais. They smartly summarize all their interests in their foremost submission without wasting any time. The Arbitrator quickly throws the first question their way. The throw is gracefully handled by the counsel and they satisfy the bench with witty explanation.
10:08 The bill of lading seems to be a challenging point of contention. The counsel is tense as the arbitrator refers to a Statute. While the counsel is well aware of the provisions, they seem to be missing on the legislative intent and concept behind it. Though unsatisfied, the bench directs the claimant to proceed further.
10:10 The claimant’s struggle to substantiate their right to sue and establish ownership of the disputed goods. The arbitrator continues their grilling, while the counsel seems dumbfounded.
10:13 The claimants find solace in their written submissions. The bench is keenly scrutinizing the memorial. The arbitrator quickly observes a legal lacunae and weaves an intricate web of questions. The counsel seems desperate to answer. Will the claimants be able to pacify the arbitrators?
10:17 The bench is weary of the intentions of the claimant’s client. The bench is not willing to sacntion any claim made in bad faith. The claimant struggles to justify the actions their client.
10:21 The counsel proceeds with the next submission. Like a spell casted on the bench, the claimants have the utmost attention of the arbitrators. The contractual relationship is so meticulously and beautifully explained by the counsel, there is no room for the bench to pose questions.
10:25 With 2 minutes left, the counsel is struggling to find the essential pieces of the ultimate puzzle. A series of rapid-fire disagreements grow intense between the claimants and the bench. The tension in the room so tangible, it could be struck with a gavel.
10:27 The counsel seeks time extension which is promptly granted. The claimants finally bring up a novel argument. They wittily shrug off their client’s liability regarding the lien of godos. The bench appears unusually appeased. The counsel appears to be a legal acrobat, flipping through pages and case laws with impressive agility.
10:32 The co-counsel now takes the dais with confidence and an assertive tone. The counsel delves straight into the dispute regarding the contract of indemnity. The counsel refers to the submitted compendium and is patiently assisting the bench in following the line of arguments being presented. The allegations made against the respondent is about shamble in light of the challenging question thrown its way. Will the bill of lading stand the ultimate test, or will it be laid, once and for all.
10:40 As the coffees for the bench get colder, the hot bench gives no respite to the counsel. The counsel struggles to hold its ground. Oooh! The last question was a blow, too hard to tackle. Though the counsel is able to offer an explanation, the bench is far from satisfied.
10:43 The air is thick with objections and questions. The counsel stands strong and valorous before the bench. The claimants seem to be failing in their task of convincing the bench as they continue its questioning on the claimant’s right to sue.
10:48 While the claimant is able to pacify the bench, due to paucity of time, the counsel pleads to proceed with the next submission. Will the claimants be able to come out of this marsh around the nature of their claim they have casually walked into?
10:52 Bang on! With an interesting submission, the claimants submit substantial evidence to prove the loss incurred by their client. The bench is surprisingly impressive. Can this mean brownie points for the claimants?
10:56 The bill of lading is back as the counsel is fretting and grappling to satisfy the queries with adequate justifications in order to stay afloat. Will the claimants come out with a lantern, or will they be lost in the fog of legal ambiguity?
11:00 The respondents have taken the dais, determined to leave no stone unturned to brush away the claims of the other party assertively, yet gracefully.
11:05 The team comes to the rescue of the standing counsel who struggles to justify the foremost submission.The arbitrator searches for justification regarding the cargos. The respondents are unable to submit their clear stance on the bill of lading. The counsel, unable to pacify the bench, beseeches the bench to proceed with their next submission.
11:13 The struggling counsel moves forward by putting forward its arguments related to the cargos. The pile of unanswered queries and unfilled gaps of the previous arguments fall heavy on this argument. Unable to justify the previous claims, the bench cannot be possibly satisfied with the arguments being put forth.
11:16 The counsel navigates carefully, through the treacherous waters of the ‘sea of questions’. The room is thundering with the arbitrator’s gavel, as it strikes at the references to the Charter party agreement. Will the respondents sail through this storm?
11:20 The respondents struggle to establish their rights under the contract. They fail to outmaneuver their opponents, as the arbitrators refer to a submission of the claimants. The respondents seem lost in darkness. The scribbling pencil of the counsel is the only thing louder than the questions. Will the note passed by the team be of any solace?
11:27 The second speaker approaches the dais. Will the second counsel be able to satisfy the arbitrators or will the weight of ambiguity in the prior arguments act as a hindrance in the way forward?
11:31 The counsel takes out the magic wand as they refer to the “Himalaya Clause”. But pleasing the arbitrators on this one is as challenging as moving the mountains.
11:35 The arbitrators chuckle hard, as they still struggle to understand the respondent’s position on the contract and the bill of lading. The counsel is unusually calm in the face of calamity. Every submission is meticulously made, avoiding any contradiction with the previous submissions, while bolstering the novel arguments.
11:39 The counsel is stuck in an everlasting game of Jenga, carefully balancing the questions on the way forward. Every argument pulled is an opportunity to bag victory, yet it threatens the validity of their claims. The question regarding the bill is tackled with remarkable skill, effortlessly sidestepping any potential pitfalls.
11:44 Unbeknownst to the respondent, they had been digging a vast trench of unsubstantiated arguments. The counsel is caught off guard, when the arbitrators seek clarifications on the same. Will the respondents take a leap of impressive arguments, or will they fall flat on this one?
11:49 The respondents conclude their arguments, and the claimants take the dais in a jiffy without wasting precious time.
11:51 Madame Arbitrator, throws a hard blow at the foremost rebuttal by the claimants. The counsel is well acquainted with her stance and offers a delineated explanation for the same.
11:53 The respondents exchange glances, hastily making notes for their sur-rebuttals as they get ready to get on the dais. A catena of disagreements follow between the bench and the respondents. A query on the legislative intent of one of the rules takes the respondents down a sloppy slope.
11:58 With this, the first semi finale of the season comes to an end as the arbitrators humbly ask the teams to leave the courtroom. Stay tuned to find out who makes it to the finals!
SF 2 : Rotterdam v. Jebel
12:20 The room is charged with anticipation and nervous energy as the teams await the commencement of this deciding round. Meanwhile, the Bench meticulously analyzes the documents before them, signaling the commencement of the second round of semi-finals of the day.
12:23 As the first speaker of the Claimants’ team assumes their position behind the dais, they commence their arguments with vigor. However, the Tribunal interjects with an inquiry regarding the Claimants’ ownership of the cargo in question.
12:27 The Bench poses a question regarding a specific case, requesting the Claimant to present its facts. Another question follows swiftly, catching the Claimant off guard, evident in the noticeable dip in their confidence.
12:36 A question catches the claimant off guard, momentarily leaving their face blank. However, they quickly gather their thoughts and deliver a strong response, which appears to satisfy the query that was put forth by the bench.
12:39 Like a drumbeat echoing through the room, the claimant repeatedly emphasizes on the importance of a certain clause. Simultaneously, with each supporting judgment, the bench fires questions like arrows, testing the claimant’s arguments like a knight’s shield under siege.
12:42 The intense scrutiny from the bench shows no signs of relenting. With just 3 minutes remaining, the claimant persists in addressing the issue of one of the respondents’ right. However, this seems to have ignited disagreement between them and the tribunal, adding further tension to the proceedings.
12:46 Like a marathon runner pushing beyond the finish line, the Claimant seeks permission to continue addressing a crucial question even as the time expires. Just as they prepare to conclude, they circle back to a previous inquiry from the tribunal, displaying a tenacity akin to a lion refusing to yield its ground.
12:48 As speaker two of the Claimant enters the battlefield, they are immediately met with a question from the Arbitrators. With unwavering confidence, they swiftly respond, effectively shielding themselves from the initial onslaught. Now, the true test lies ahead to see if they can persevere and emerge unscathed from this challenging arena.
12:56 The Arbitrators seem to have come across a certain “agreement to sell’ which is absent from the memo but is shown in the submission presented by the Claimants. With great reasoning, they seem to have overcome another hurdle thrown their way by the Tribunal.
13:00 A barrage of questions regarding the “bill of lading” is hurled at the Claimant, highlighting its significance in the discussion. Undeterred, the Claimant continues to field each question without showing any sign of weariness, demonstrating their resilience and determination.
13:05 A certain action taken by the Claimants is called into question, particularly regarding whether it was done in “good faith,” prompting a flurry of inquiries from the Arbitrators. One particularly curious Arbitrator shows a determined stance, unwilling to let the Claimant off the hook easily on this matter.
13:08 With just 3 minutes left on the clock, the Claimant requests a minute’s extension from the Tribunal. However, their request is met with a query from the Arbitrators regarding a certain case. The facts of this case appear irrelevant to the Claimants’ arguments, prompting the question of why it was included in their compendium in the first place.
13:14 As one of the Arbitrators appears to be dissatisfied, the reason behind it remains ambiguous—whether from exhaustion or being frustrated with the Claimants’ arguments. However, before any conclusions can be drawn, they raise a certain disagreement with the Claimant, further intensifying the atmosphere of the Courtroom.
13:19 As the Respondent begins their turn behind the dais, they are immediately met with an intriguing question from the Bench. They inadvertently invite further questioning while answering. The Arbitrators’ smiles betray a sense of frustration, hinting at the challenging road ahead for the Respondent.
13:26 The Arbitrators take a moment to align with the Respondent on a certain case referenced by them. The Respondent continues to emphasize their “right to lien” in the present case, a point that was challenged by the Claimants just moments ago in their arguments.
13:30 The body language of the Respondent exudes confidence and self-assurance as they assert their stance. They cleverly use an analogy involving two Arbitrators, effectively illustrating their argument. This seems to have left quite an impression upon the Arbitrators.
13:35 Perhaps it was premature to assess, as the Arbitrators now delve deeper into the analogy presented by the Respondent, raising further questions and scrutinizing its validity. The Respondent maintains unwavering eye contact with the Arbitrators, answering their questions with steadfast determination.
13:41 With just a minute left, tension mounts in the room. Seeking an extension, the Respondent passionately defends their arguments while addressing Arbitrators’ doubts. But a query arises about a case presented by the Claimants. Can the Respondent satisfy the arbitrators and prove relevancy of their case over that of the Claimants?
13:47 As Respondent 2 takes the floor, their persuasive voice fills the room. However, mere eloquence won’t suffice to impress the arbitrators. The question remains: will their arguments be as persuasive as their voice? Only time will tell.
13:55 The Respondent makes a reference to their submission, eliciting smiles and whispered exchanges amongst the Arbitrators. Suddenly, a question is posed that momentarily baffles the Respondent. Before they can gather their thoughts to respond, another question follows swiftly.
14:08 As the round nears its end, one of the arbitrators quietly jots down notes, possibly valuable feedback for the parties post-session. With just a minute remaining, the Respondent rushes to summarize their arguments. However, they are interrupted by the bench, still brimming with queries. An arbitrator seeks the Respondent’s interpretation of a certain section related to the Bill of Lading.
14:16 As rebuttals begin, Claimant 2 responds to a question from the Bench before Claimant 1 starts. With seamless coordination, they navigate through the Tribunal’s queries. With a minute left, urgency fills the speaker’s voice.
14:23 The respondent has taken the floor to begin with the sur-rebuttals. As they continue to counter the rebuttals presented by the claimants, they are helped by their team in answering the queries interjected by the Arbitrators. Time’s up! However, with a minute’s extension they continue to satiate the never-ending queries of the arbitrators. Stay with us as we find out who wins this round and qualifies to the ultimate challenge- THE FINALS!
Day 3 | 17th March 2024
SEMI-FINAL ROUNDS
CONCLUDE!
Day 3 | 17th March 2024
FINAL ROUNDS
Jebel v. Santos
16:17 Welcome to the 11th NLUO Bose & Mitra International Maritime Arbitration Moot! After surviving multiple rounds of elimination, the two strongest teams have reached here and within the next few hours, it will be decided who takes home the trophy and the huge cash prize! The judges are seated, the teams have arrived. Let the mooting begin!
16:23 The teams that have made it this far include the National Law University Delhi and National Law University Jodhpur. The Claimants, NLUD are beginning with their submissions. It was remarked by an Arbitrator of Preliminary rounds that the facts of this case are in favour of the Respondent. Can NLUD prove him wrong?
16:25 The Arbitrator’s inquiry into the Claimant’s status as the lawful holder persists, casting a shadow of uncertainty over the proceedings. Undeterred, the Claimant exudes confidence, assuring the Bench that this matter will be addressed by their co-counsel. With steely resolve, they have moved to their next submission.
16:32 The Claimants are prepared for every contingency. They present an argument substantiated with case laws to cover the situation where the Arbitrators hold their title to sue as invalid. This argument is not taken well by the arbitrators as they immediately question the Claimant with regards to his pleadings.
16:39 “That’s irrelevant Counsel. In Common Law, you can exercise the right of lien over a third party.” To counter this curbstone by the Arbitrators, the calm Claimant directs the attention of the Arbitrators to the Clause 23 of Charter Party. The questioning Arbitrator looks satisfied, the presiding Arbitrator however, presses Claimant on what is the basic meaning of lien.
16:44 “The amplitude of the lien clause aligns precisely with my submission,” asserts the Counsel for the Claimant in response to the Arbitrator’s query. However, the Arbitrator’s dissatisfaction is palpable as they press further, questioning the Claimant’s familiarity with a pertinent case law. Caught off guard, the Claimant struggles to provide a satisfactory response.
16:48 “But aren’t the shippers sub-charterers?” “Members of the Tribunal, shippers are not sub-charterers.” The Claimant dodges a trick question even as the Arbitrator is willing to test the knowledge of the Claimant to his limits, as he continues to assert why the shippers are essentially sub-charterers.
16:52 The Claimant invokes the precedent set by the Miramar case, the arbitrators find themselves perplexed and state that the judgment contradicts the Claimants’ position. Undeterred, the Claimant’s researcher presents the compendium to the Arbitrators, hoping to sway their conviction. However, the Arbitrators remain unconvinced
16:56 The co-Claimant takes the dais, but they are not saved from the fate of their teammate which is reflected in their question to the Claimant. The Arbitrators, poised and inquisitive, launch their inquiry just as the co-Claimant begins their argument and ask them the question “How do you justify your title to sue?”
17:00 “That case does not help you” With blunt candour, the Bench dismisses the case cited by the Claimant, delivering a decisive blow to their argument. The words hang heavy in the courtroom, signalling the formidable challenge ahead for the Claimant. Undeterred by the Bench’s uncompromising stance, the Claimant must now regroup and recalibrate their strategy in the face of this setback. In this high-stakes legal battle, the Bench is ensuring that victory may indeed be hard-won.
17:04 As the relentless grilling of the Claimant by the Bench unfolds, even the Respondents huddle together, their brows furrowed in deep concentration as they pore over their memo. In whispered tones, they exchange thoughts and insights, meticulously preparing their defense. The spectators wonder: Will the Respondent survive the storm of scrutiny? Have they unearthed a flaw in the Claimant’s case, or perhaps discovered vulnerabilities in their own arguments? We are about to find out with time.
17:08 The Arbitrators’ inquiries are coming in swiftly and persistently, presenting a significant challenge for the Claimant. Despite the researcher’s efforts to provide clarification through a note, the Arbitrators continue to seek further details regarding the bill of lading. The Claimant is addressing these questions calmly and with attention to detail. It doesn’t seem enough to satisfy the Arbitrators.
17:12 As the co-Counsel’s allotted time nears completion, they remain attentively engaged in addressing the Arbitrator’s detailed inquiries. This rigorous examination has deferred the presentation of their pleadings, which they may not be able to address, taking in consideration the Arbitrators’ laser focus on a fundamental question.
17:15 As the co-Counsel elucidates the distinction between an agreement to sell and a sale, all eyes turn to the Bench, seeking clues from their expressions. A subtle nod from the Arbitrators conveys their acceptance of the response, easing tensions in the courtroom. With this validation, the co-Counsel’s argument gains credibility, bolstering the confidence of their team. Yet, amidst the fleeting moment of reassurance, they should remain vigilant, knowing that the challenges of the courtroom can swiftly shift.
17:17 “Show me which provision of the Hague-Visby rules allows you to justify a claim for late delivery.” The Claimant’s attempt to use the Hague-Visby rules to their benefit backfires.
17:20 “Members of the Tribunal, you could have said that – oh no wait that’s our contention.” The tense atmosphere of the courtroom is broken by a humorous slip-up by the Claimant.
17:23 “May I approach the Panel?” requests the counsel for the respondent, exuding confidence as they stride towards the dais. With measured steps and unwavering resolve, they begin to address their issues, each word carrying the weight of their expertise and preparation. Are the respondents the legal eagle poised for triumph, or merely a humble participant in the arena of maritime law? Only time will tell.
17:25 Barely two minutes into the Respondent’s argument, the bench wastes no time in dismantling their assertion. They challenge the foundation of the respondent’s argument, casting doubt on their interpretation of the FOB contract. In this abrupt turn of events, the pressure mounts for the Respondent, who must now navigate the scrutiny of the bench with agility and precision.
17:29 “What are you trying to establish?” queries the presiding Arbitrator, their tone firm and probing. In this arena of legal discourse, persuasion is no easy feat, for the Arbitrators scrutinize every assertion with unyielding skepticism.
17:32 “This actually is an admission that you are arm-twisting the other party and acted unreasonably,” declares the bench without mincing words. The sharp rebuke lands heavily on the respondent, exposing a critical slip in their argument.This is a pivotal moment as the trajectory of the case now hangs in balance, as the respondent grapples with the repercussions of their misstep. Will they be able to redeem themselves?
17:34 “Answer my question madam” the Arbitrator is not impressed by the Respondent’s attempt to move on to their second issue without addressing the question at hand.
17:37 Should a mooter appreciate it when the Arbitrators are helping them? Will this work in favour of the Respondents or backfire yet again? The spectators are left wondering as the Arbitrator gives three alternate arguments to the Respondent.
17:42 As soon as the Respondent transitions to their second issue regarding the lawful holder of the goods, they are swiftly interrupted by the Bench’s probing question. Their inquiry hinders the flow of the Respondent’s argument, demanding immediate attention and justification. The Respondent must now navigate carefully through the turbulent waters of judicial scrutiny.
17:44 The presiding Arbitrator advises “Don’t concede, or then you’ll lose.” The Respondent doesn’t agree with it and continues to highlight that even if they concede, they still have certain interests. The Tribunal looks unimpressed.
17:46 “Could Mr. Arbitrator rephrase their question?” The Respondent’s request for clarification hangs in the air, prompting a pause in the proceedings as they seek a clearer understanding of the Bench’s query. The Respondent’s demeanor carries a hint of hesitancy as they navigate the exchange with the Bench.
17:48 The Co-Respondent approaches the dais, stuttering a bit. Even the strongest of teams are not immune to the pressure of the finals. The Arbitrators sense the uncertainty, immediately striking at the core of the argument of the Respondent by stating that her co-counsel conceded their right to a contractual lien.
17:53 “How are you a party to the arbitration?” inquires the Bench, but the Respondent struggles to provide a concrete answer. The Bench, appearing dissatisfied with the Respondent’s response, redirects them to address another issue, signaling a desire to explore different facets of the case.
17:58 The Bench is delving deeper into the interpretation of the judgment cited by the second speaker, probing for clarity and coherence in their argument. Will the Respondents satisfy their inquiries with a compelling explanation, or will the Bench uncover contradictions within their case?
18:00 The Bench astutely highlights a crucial aspect of the case, questioning, “Shouldn’t you as the Respondents be contesting the jurisdiction?” This observation uncovers a fundamental flaw in the Respondents’ argument, eliciting a reaction from everyone but the Respondents, who look positively concerned. The Bench asks the Respondents to move on to their next issue, leaving this mistake behind.
18:03 A fiery exchange ensues between the co-counsel and the Bench regarding the possession of the goods, yet amidst the intensity, the co-counsel maintains a composed demeanor, steadfast in their resolve.
18:07 The Bench has directed the co-counsel to recite a specific clause from the Hague-Visby Rules, indicating a meticulous examination of the case. Could this be a sign of the Bench uncovering yet another potential flaw in the argument? The Bench really is testing the mettle of the Respondents indicating that the path to victory in this finale is not a piece of cake for anyone.
18:09 The pleadings come to an end, now is the time for the rebuttals. Will the participants be able to use this final opportunity to make a lasting impression on the Bench? The Claimant confidently approaches the dais and makes only one rebuttal and leaves. The Claimants seem to be very confident in their case.
18:10 With three minutes reserved for their sur-rebuttal, the Respondent stands poised for a final opportunity to dismantle the case presented by the Claimants. Will they capitalize on this window to deliver a decisive blow, undermining the foundation of their opponent’s arguments?
18:12 As the relentless grilling draws to a close, the tension in the courtroom reaches its peak. With both sides having faced rigorous scrutiny from the Bench, the question remains: Who will emerge victorious? And whose case will become just another footnote in the annals of legal lore? We are about to find out.
