Call For PapersLaw School News

ABOUT HPNLU

The Himachal Pradesh National Law University (HPNLU, Shimla), was established by the State Government in the year 2016, by an Act of the Legislature (Act 16 of 2016). Located in the geographical terrains of the Himalayas, HPNLU, Shimla.

ABOUT CIPR

CIPR is a newly established centre in the HPNLU family. The institution has strived to establish itself as the Nodal Center for Academics and Professionalism in legal education but is yet to specialise in Intellectual Property Rights.

ABOUT THE JOURNAL

The HPNLU Journal of Intellectual Property Rights (Volume 1) invites scholarly contributions through a call for papers for its maiden issue. The first volume of the Journal is scheduled to be published online in the month of December 2022.

The journal solicits scholarly contributions relating to legal cum theoretical developments in the field of Intellectual Property Rights.

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

Covering Letter: All submissions must be accompanied by a covering letter stating the title, author’s full name, University and year of study, and the author’s contact details. Only the cover letter should contain the above-mentioned details and not the manuscript.

Submission must be in MS Word format only.

Main Text: Times New Roman, font size 12, 1.5 spacing justified, with a left margin of 1.5 inches and right 1.0 inch, top 1.0 inch and bottom 1.0 inch. The first line of the paragraph is not to be indented.

Foot Notes- Times New Roman, font size 10, substantive footnotes are accepted.

Citation Style: For Citation, refer the HPNLU-Shimla Citation Style only. Please click here for the citation style.

Word Limit: The following word limit should be observed:

Articles (≥5000 to <8000 words)

Essays and Comments (≥3000 to <5000 words)

Book Review(≥2500 to <3500 words)

Lengthy Quotations are discouraged. Author(s) should avoid long quotations and keep them at a minimum wherever necessary with full and proper acknowledgment.

Lengthy and multi-paragraphed footnotes are discouraged. The citations must mention the page(s) of the source and in cases where Court Judgments are referred to, the footnote should also mention the paragraph of the judgment in addition to the page number of the Reporter.

Only authoritative websites may be cited. References to internet sources such as Wikipedia, blogs, commercial websites, etc., are not acceptable.

How to Submit?

Mode of Submission: Entries are to be sent at cipr@hpnlu.ac.in latest by November 20, 2022 (11:59 pm)

The submission shall be accepted only through email, and the same need to be captioned as “Submission to HPNLU-JIPR <Title of Contribution>”.

PUBLICATION POLICY

The submissions must be original and should not be under consideration in any other journal. Articles with plagiarism and copyright issues are liable to be rejected immediately.

Co-authorship is allowed for up to two co-authors only.

The manuscript should not contain any references to the identity of the authors.

Submission of work to the Journal of Intellectual Property Laws is indicative of the fact that the authors grant exclusive permission to JIPR to publish and reproduce their work in all streams of media. Such right is subject to the doctrine of fair use as followed under the law relating to Intellectual Property Rights and subject to the entitlements of the author.

The editors reserve the right to delete or edit any article or part thereof whose content is found to be offensive, defamatory, outrightly unethical, or if it is suggestive of racism, sexual or religious discrimination, illegal or terror activities, etc. The article is subjected to rejection if its content is likely to offend the religious or political sentiments of the reader.

A process of peer review shall be used to scrutinize all the submissions. Following this, the authors of elected papers will be notified of the results.

SUBMISSION DEADLINE

November 20, 2022. Entries received after the mentioned date will be considered for the next issue.

CONTACT INFORMATION

In case of queries, write to Email- cipr@hpnlu.ac.in or contact:

Ms. Jayanti Singh Karki (Student Convener)+91 7488291523

Mr. Shivam Singh (Co-Convener)+91 8707284562

Mr. Kushagra Nigam (Co-Convener)+91 8447887304

Call For PapersLaw School News

ABOUT THE JOURNAL

The HPNLU Journal of Tax Law is an annual double-blind peer-reviewed journal of the Centre for Law Business and Economics, Himachal Pradesh National Law University Shimla. The Journal aims to promote scholarly research in tax laws, including international taxation and tax policies. The HPNLU Journal of Tax Law is one of the first of its kind in India wherein specific discussion, through research works is being encouraged by academicians, professionals, practitioners and researchers. Tax laws and policies are an urgent discourse in today’s time frame where the discussions on tax reforms are ubiquitous and have effects on the lives of every individual. The scope of this Journal is to extend a forum wherein the intellectual discourse is produced concerning tax laws, policies and their impact on every individual along with the state welfare policies. These intellectual contributions are called upon to siphon the efforts and propel better tax policies in India.

CATEGORIES FOR SUBMISSION

The contribution may be made in the form of Research Papers / Article, Notes & Comments and Book Review. The contribution, in the given category, should be a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of contemporary issues in tax laws and related policies including international taxation.

The following word limits should be observed:

ARTICLES (≥6000 to <10000 words)

ESSAYS & COMMENTS (≥4000 to <6000 words)

Book Review (≥3000 to <4000 words) (Contribution under this Category is required to be made along with the new hard copy of the Book.)

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

Submissions shall be accepted only in the English language.

All contributions are required to be accompanied by an ‘abstract’ of 250- 300 words. The abstract must expressly include the novelty and usefulness of the idea that the author wishes to put forth and must categorically mention the specific contribution of the article beyond the existing available literature.
Co-authorship is allowed for up to one (01) co-author only.
The manuscript should not contain any references to the identity of the authors.
The body of the manuscript should be in Times New Roman, Font Size 12 and 1.5-line spacing. The footnotes should be in Times New Roman, Font Size 10 and single line spacing.
For Citation, refer to the HPNLU-Shimla Citation Style only. Please click the link https://hpnlu.ac.in/PDF/252e010c 6417-45fc-a15d-75fded9c3905.pdf for the citation style.
Manuscripts should only use footnotes as a means of citation. No other method shall be permitted.
Lengthy Quotations are discouraged. Author(s) should avoid long quotations and keep them at minimum wherever necessary with full and proper acknowledgement.
Lengthy and multi-paragraphed footnotes are discouraged. The citations must mention the page(s) of the source and in cases where Court Judgments are referred to, the footnote should also mention the paragraph of the judgment in addition to the page number of the Reporter.
Only authoritative websites may be cited. References to internet sources such as Wikipedia, blogs, commercial websites, etc., are not acceptable.

Send your manuscript in MS Word (.docx) format to jtl@hpnlu.ac.in. The subject of the email should be “Submission to HPNLU-JTL ”. The submissions must be sent by 11:59 pm, October 30, 2022.

CONTACT & ADDRESS

Dr. Arun Klair, (Member Editorial Board): +91-9417273800
Centre for Law, Business and Economics, Himachal Pradesh National Law University, Shimla
16 Miles, Shimla-Mandi National Highway, Ghandal, Dist. Shimla 171014

Conference/Seminars/LecturesLaw School News

The Placement Assistance Cell of Himachal Pradesh National Law University, Shimla had organized a guest lecture on ‘Legal Research’ by Mr. Sumeet Malik, Associate Editor, Supreme Court Cases Editor, SCC Online on 21st of September, 2022.

The very question as to why are the students pursuing law was the onset of the interactive session of the day. The varied and upright responses included points such as the dynamic nature of law, it is intellectually challenging, financially rewarding and personally fulfilling. In addition to the same, Mr. Malik compared the study of law to a process that is ongoing, dynamic and constantly developing with the changing needs of the society.

Mr. Sumeet Malik talked about EBC and SCC and its relevance in the modern era for every law student. EBC, that is, Eastern Book Company is the intellectual giant in legal publishing, which has traditionally published a wide range of legal commentaries, student texts, law reports and digests. Today, its products include pioneering works both in the print and electronic medium. The EBC group has come up with Supreme Court Cases (SCC), SC Yearly Digest and Complete Digest, SCC Online, EBC Webstore, EBC Student Books and Practitioner Commentaries, EBC Reader, SCC Online Blog, EBC Explorer and the Practical Lawyer magazine.

Other topics covered during the session included an example of legal interpretation and its particular pertinence to the same. The relevance and understanding of citations were also explained in the session. It was also explained that what all points constitute the annotation of the case and how is it supposed to be written.

Mr. Malik also emphasized upon the relevance of statutes, which led to the discussion on kinds of sources of law. By citing various examples, he explained that when does a law gets enforced or when does an “act” become a “law’. It was easy to decipher the topic of discussion with the help of precise and easy examples given during the session.

Mr. Malik also talked about the hierarchy of the Indian courts, the powers of the courts at different levels and certain sections of the Indian Constitution like Article 393, 76 and 226. One of the most vital learning from the session was that it is important to rely on authentic sources while doing some research work and every word that we come across must be interpreted in a manner that leaves no scope of confusion and does not reflect arbitrariness. In addition, it was also discussed that it is important to name and number the acts properly.

The session ended with a round of questions and answers and it was indeed an informative and enlightening session for all.

The Guest Lecture was divided in 2 sessions, wherein the morning session was kept for the 2nd and 3rd year students of FYIC at the Himachal Pradesh National Law University and the evening was kept for the students for 1st, 4th and final year students. It was attended by a cumulative strength of around 200 students. The session was fruitful and motivational to all the students.

Law School NewsLive Blogging

The Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution (CADR), Himachal Pradesh National Law University, Shimla is ecstatic with excitement to welcome you all to the most awaited event 2nd National Mediation Competition – 2022, wherein teams representing the top universities participate from all around the country.

In the domains of law, justice, and governance, we want to encourage the progress of education, research, and practice and instil in the pupils a special mix of theoretical knowledge with practical learning and skill development. Even during the pandemic, our abilities, excitement, spirit, and desire for mediation remain unbounded. And by offering a captivating and comfortable experience, we at the Himachal Pradesh National Law University, Shimla want to achieve the objective of fostering the amazing talent involved.

About the Centre for ADR & Professional Skills

The Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution [ADR] and Professional Skills primarily aim to promote research in the field of dispute resolution mechanisms in India. The Centre aims to provide a platform for interaction between professionals in the field and students. In pursuance of its goal of conditioning the law students to efficiently resolve disputes and after witnessing tremendous success in the first edition, the Centre is intending to continue it as a flagship event of HPNLU, Shimla. We firmly believe that such events and competitions not only inculcate a sense of professionalism but also take participants a step closer to the dynamic thinking requiring them to act in real-time.

2nd National Mediation Competiton, 2022

Second National Mediation Competition is the second edition of the flagship event. After witnessing a great response and appreciation from the participants across 32 premier law colleges and assessors across the globe, this event is yet another step taken by the Centre for ADR and Professional Skills, HPNLU, Shimla towards acting as facilitator in increasing the Mediation among aspiring students. The competition seeks to provide a prodigious experience that will amplify the interests of young minds in this niche practice of law. The competition will help students brainstorm probable solutions for a near to real challenges while providing them with the comfort of choosing their roles as per their preferences. This competition will also provide an opportunity for the participants to develop the requisite lawyering and communication skills through various training sessions conducted by industry professionals. The participants are expected to take a multi-dimensional approach to reach a settlement, showcasing the variety of skills that can be useful in effective mediation.

About IDRC

IDRC (Indian Dispute Resolution Centre) is an initiative of ‘Indian Dispute Resolution Council’ is duly empanelled with the Ministry of Law & Justice, Government of India for providing Alternative Dispute Resolution services through Arbitration, Mediation and Conciliation online to Government Ministries, Departments, Organisations and Public Sector Undertakings. IDRC is dedicated to provide a highly professional, efficient and state-of-the-art institutional environment for both online and offline resolution of all kinds of disputes in a time bound and cost effective manner. This initiative is backed up by our proven track record in the legal field for the provision of world-class institutional support as a neutral and independent venue for the conduct of Domestic and International Arbitration and other Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) proceedings.

About PACT

The Peacekeeping and Conflict Resolution Team (PACT) is a team of like-minded professionals who share the vision of promoting the use of consensual dispute resolution (CDR). As a collective, the PACT aims to catalyze the development of CDR in India and abroad through its innovative initiatives. Conceptualized by law and psychology graduates, The PACT grew up along the shores of Goa, is currently headquartered in New Delhi, and has begun working on projects beyond India. The mission is to cross geographical boundaries and stereotypes, and take Consensual Dispute Resolution to every corner of this globe.

DAY 1 : INAUGURAL CEREMONY

11:05 AM The ceremony started with a welcome address by Mr. Santosh Kumar Sharma, Director, CADR and Ms. Saloni Paliwal & Ms Pakhi Jain, the Convenors of the Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution & Professional Skills, virtually inaugurated the 2nd National Mediation Competiton, 2022.

11:13 AM  Our Special Invitee, Mr. Santanu Mukherjee, Founder, Ex Ledge Chamber and Former Partner, Luthra & Luthra Law Offices started his speech by appreciating the constitution of an ADR Centre in the HPNLU, Shimla. Also, He appreciated Professional Skills Training along with CADR in the university. He taught about the lessons of Mediation and its importance in today’s real world.

11:23 AM  Another Special Invitee, Ms. Sumedha Rathi, Senior Partner, Lexidem & Rathi thanked HPNLU, Shimla for having her for this Inaugural session. Afterwards, Ma’am discussed the importance of Mediation by emphasizing the Mediation process categorizing it to be a peaceful process as compared to other processes. Further, she emphasized the need for a codified law in Mediation and Mediation Bill 2021 which ensures promoting institutional mediation and encourages community and online mediation. She wished all the best to all the participants and the organizing committee of CADR.

11:35 AM  Now coming forward with the inaugural ceremony, our Guest of Honour, Ms. Anupama Ahluwalia, an attorney with over 16 years of experience in international & domestic legal matters. She has worked with top-tier law firms-Shearman & Sterling, Singapore; O’ Melveny & Myers, NY and Paul Hastings, NY and her clients have ranged from MNCs, Financial Firms, and Global NGOs to International institutions. Over the years, she has worked in U.S., Singapore and India and is admitted to practice law in New York and Delhi, India.

11:46 AM  With this, Our Chief Guest Mr. Tejas Karia, Partner, Shardul Amarchand Mangladas & Co. thanked the Organizing Committee of CADR, HPNLU, Shimla for inviting him as the Chief Guest. Sir started his words by telling us about hybrid models are successful in settling disputes whereas, Mediation plays an important role in narrow disputes. Also, Sir taught about the appreciated confidentiality in mediation, legislations that provide for mediation, and Organisations – CAMP, PACT, IDRC (working closely on training and capacity building through institutional mediation). He gave recommendations before the parliamentary discussion – we would see a mediation act – the impetus to commercial mediation. At last, our esteemed guest wished all the best to all participants and the university for organizing this competition.

12:06 PM  With this a Vote of Thanks is presented by our Director of CADR, HPNLU, Shimla to all the esteemed guests and invited them in near future to visit the campus in Shimla. Now, The participants are now ready to go into tomorrow’s Preliminary Rounds.

Signing off for today! We will be back with full enthusiasm to join the Preliminary Rounds.

 DAY 2: PRELIMINARY ROUNDS 1

Room number 01 | Team Code 212 v. Team Code 228

10:16 AM Greetings to one and all! The judges and participants have arrived! They exchange pleasantries and introduce themselves to each other and the round commences. Instructions are read out by the host. The mediator greets the judge and other participants. Client Stanley Hudson and their counsel introduce them. Energy Webb private limited clients and counsel have introduced them. Mediators is instructing both parties about the mediation proceedings. The mediator briefed both parties about the rules of the mediation round.

10:28 AM Stanley Hudson, requesting party talks about himself and highlights of the contract. Counsel thanks mediators for initiating proceedings and hope to find a solution through these mediation proceedings. Counsel for Stanley Hudson highlights the main point of discussion and points out how her client has been impacted by a breach of contract. The mediator takes over the proceedings and asks the responding party to start with their opening statement.

10:37 AM CEO of Energy Whipped Private Limited introduces her company to the mediators and counsel. Responding Party states that Stanley Hudson has been an asset to the company and hopes to have the contract in future as well. Counsel for the responding party to take over the proceeding. Counsel highlights the contract between the requesting party and the responding party. Counsel highlights the three main points of the mediation. The mediator takes over and draws out the disagreement between the parties. The Mediator highlights the keenness of the responding party to continue with the contract with the requesting party.

10:47 AM Requesting party continues to explain his situation after consuming the responding party’s product. Judge asks counsel to directly come upon the issue. The mediator asks the requesting party to take over and put some light on future contracts and compensation needed by the requesting party. Counsel of the requesting party brings to notice the mediator the need to retain the contract and apology needed from the responding party. TC 228 Client put forward what the company has faced due to the act of requesting a party, further she mentions the interest of the company.

10:55 AM Judge tells both the parties that this mediation is going nowhere and directs them to put some light on the issue and mediation process directly. The mediator asks the responding party to establish the grounds to prove that because their product Stanley Hudson is not injured. Counsel continues to explain their side and asks for a caucus to take place. Judge due to some time constraints asks both the parties to conclude

Requesting party proposes a solution. The requesting party asks the responding party for a public survey to happen and issue a public apology. The responding party assures requesting party of the best marketing terms and a public survey to happen.

11:03 AM Mediator directs both the parties on what needs to be discussed in the next session which mainly includes the grounds of compensation. Counsel of the responding party tells the mediator that they are ready to pay half of the total amount asked by the requesting party as compensation. The mediator tells both parties to go on with their closing statements.

11:06 AM: The mediator asks the Judge if any question is to be asked. The judge in response asks a question both the parties if they have given their best BATNA. The responding party answers the question by highlighting the importance of the caucus. Requesting party answers the same.

Host thanked all the participants and the judge for giving their valuable time and initiation.

Room number 04 | Team Code 204 v Team Code 219

10:49 AM  Greetings everyone, The Judge and the participants representing both parties have arrived. The host is greeting everyone and explains the rules to all the participants. Both parties introduced themselves and exchanged pleasantries. The mediator has begun the session by greeting both parties and explaining the procedure of the mediation.

10: 56 AM On the request of mediator 1, mediator 2 clarifies all the rules of the mediation and how this session shall proceed. The Mediator asked the requesting party to begin their speech. The requesting party’s client talks about his background and how he faced various challenges he had faced during his early life. The Counsel of the requesting party talks about how he and Stanley know each other. He explains all the issues related to the present case. The counsel assures them that they will take all the healthy measures to resolve their dispute.

11:07 AM The client of Energy Whipped Pvt. Ltd, thanks to Stanley for calling them and asking to resolve their dispute by mediation. The client explains their other issue which is related to the losses they suffered. The client tells him that they want to clear out the past mistakes and asks for the backup report from Stanley which provides the information related to the reports that state that he suffered health issues due to consuming Veber.

11:13 AM  The council of the responding party, raises the issue that due to the allegations of Stanley they had suffered various losses. They want to keep that contract intact and the form of that contract shall be discussed in this mediation.

11:16 AM  The mediator pointed out the following agendas on which both parties want to have their negotiation. These agendas were related to the Explanation and clarification of the statement made by Mr. Stanley, Secondly on the injury which is suffered by Stanley after the consumption of that product. And thirdly related to the continuation of their original contract and their future relationship. 

11: 20 AM  The counsel of Mr. Stanley raises the question of why their product was launched some days before the day of launching it and whether all the qualitative measures were taken by the responding party to check the quality of their product. The counsel for the requesting party stated that Other players might not have suffered anything that might because Stanley had more rigorous training in comparison to the other players.

11: 27 AM The client of the responding party explains that all the essential measures were taken to check the quality of VeBar. The client ensures that they have taken proper checks and tells them no other customer has reported any problems that are caused to them after consuming their product. The client also tells them other players are also using their product and there are no health problems they are facing due to rebar. The counsel of the responding party also tells them that their products are checked again and again to check the quality of their product.

11:34 AM The host asks the parties if they want to have a caucus session right now. The counsel assures that they are not facing any problems and there is no need for a caucus session. The session continues. The mediator asks the timekeeper to pause the time for a minute as the counsel, Stanley is facing some technical issues and is unable to join.

11:37 AM Stanley joins and the session continues. The mediator summarizes and tells that both parties have agreed to have a third-party internal check. The counsel tells them that they will not be able to share their medical report and instead they will send them a certificate that a milk-based product was found in their bar. The counsel of the responding party wants clarification that Vebar and Stanley will have a future relationship and that the contractual part will be discussed after this mediation. Mediator 226 asks them if they can move to their second agenda related to the contractual part.

11:42 AM Client tells that their relationship had benefited both of them. He tells them he hopes to buy some shares of energy whip PVT ltd so that they can also contribute to them and assure their trust in them. The mediator tells them there is less time left with them and if they can discuss the other issue.

11:47 AM They will be willing to give them a certain share of their company but it will be contingent on their previous contract and they are willing to have this solution. They have agreed to have a third-party investigation. They welcome their interest in purchasing shares of their company. But they tell them that they should have another mediation so that they can discuss the terms related to their new contract. The mediator tells that both parties have done a good job of reaching a solution. The mediators wish luck to both parties. All the participants appreciate each other’s work. He round wraps and both the parties promise each other to meet again as soon as possible.

11:54 AM The judge gave positive remarks on the performance of all the participants. He appreciated the skills of both parties. The judge gave his critiques on the point that both parties were facing network issues and due to this, there was a waste of time. At last, he ended the session by praising both parties and ended the session on a positive note.

Room number 08 | Team Code 208 v. Team Code 217

10:03 AM The session started with the host giving a welcome note to the judge and the participants. We are honored to have Adv Dinesh Bishnoi among us as a judge. He is a bachelor of law in international law and labor. He has conducted various judicial trials as presiding officer, defending officer, and also as judge advocate at various courts.

10:09 AM The session was continued by the host by elaborating on the rules of the competition. The mediator begins with an opening and introduction of the mediation. The parties have agreed to choose this online mediation table with certified meditators. The session then proceeded with the introduction of the parties. Counsel for the requesting party agreed to be referred to as Stanley Hudson. Our mediators then briefed everyone on the nuances of the mediation process, along with the element of confidentiality and caucus (a private mediation session).

10:16 AM The parties introduced themselves. The client for the requesting party introduces himself as a basketball player who has been asked to be the brand ambassador of V bar due to which his health deteriorated. The client for the responding party thanked Mr. Stanley and introduced his international energy drinks brand, which has been sustaining and thriving for over 25 years. The company made a 5-year contract with Mr. Stanley leading to an increase in the popularity of V bar.

10:22 AM The co-mediator proceeds with the session and lists down the agendas:- trust, losses suffered, and accountability of MNC. The responding party was also concerned with the breach of contract, primary reason for abdominal pain, and statements of Mr. Hudson.

10:29 AM Both parties negotiated on Agenda 1, i.e., trust. The responding party contented that Mr. Stanley should have talked instead of making a comment due to which they lost faith in customers.

10:36 AM Mediators facilitated the session well. A caucus was called by the requesting party. They discussed the issue of staying in the contract. The party made clear that they want to stay in contract for the next 5 years. It was concluded in the open session that both parties wish to continue the contract.

10:41 AM Then, the responding party called for a caucus. They accepted that they have not met the standards and the product was released before the actual release date due to customer demand. They asked for the compensation of defamatory loss and monetary compensation, if possible.

10:46 AM The session was concluded. Both parties wish to renegotiate the terms of the contract. Mediators gave a general recap of the session. By the end, Judge remarked about the session. He highlighted that body language is important as soon as you are on camera. Mediators should allot more time to parties than to themselves. The session should lead to some results with time being an important element. Don’t get bogged down so much in procedural aspects that you miss the crux of the session. Moreover, the hand movement should remain below your shoulders because it is not political speech. The session ended with a thank note from the host.     

10:53 AM The session was continued by the host by elaborating on the rules of the competition. The mediator begins with an opening and introduction of the mediation. The parties have agreed to choose this online mediation table with certified meditators. The session then proceeded with the introduction of the parties. Counsel for the requesting party agreed to be referred to as Stanley Hudson. Our mediators then briefed everyone on the nuances of the mediation process, along with the element of confidentiality and caucus (a private mediation session).

10:59 AM The parties introduced themselves. The client for the requesting party introduces himself as a basketball player who has been asked to be the brand ambassador of V bar due to which his health deteriorated. The client for the responding party thanked Mr. Stanley and introduced his international energy drinks brand, which has been sustaining and thriving for over 25 years. The company made a 5-year contract with Mr. Stanley leading to an increase in the popularity of V bar.

11:06 AM The co-mediator proceeds with the session and lists down the agendas:- trust, losses suffered, and accountability of MNC. The responding party was also concerned with the breach of contract, primary reason for abdominal pain, and statements of Mr. Hudson.

11:09 AM Both parties negotiated on Agenda 1, i.e., trust. The responding party contented that Mr. Stanley should have talked instead of making a comment due to which they lost faith in customers. Mediators facilitated the session well. A caucus was called by the requesting party. They discussed the issue of staying in the contract. The party made clear that they want to stay in contract for the next 5 years. It was concluded in the open session that both parties wish to continue the contract. Then, the responding party called for a caucus. They accepted that they have not met the standards and the product was released before the actual release date due to customer demand. They asked for the compensation of defamatory loss and monetary compensation, if possible.

11:16 AM The session was concluded. Both parties wish to renegotiate the terms of the contract. Mediators gave a general recap of the session. By the end, Judge remarked about the session. He highlighted that body language is important as soon as you are on camera. Mediators should allot more time to parties than to themselves. The session should lead to some results with time being an important element. Don’t get bogged down so much in procedural aspects that you miss the crux of the session. Moreover, the hand movement should remain below your shoulders because it is not political speech. The session ended with a thank note from the host.

Room 15 | Team Code 215 v. Team Code 224 

10:23 AM The Judge and the participants have arrived. They exchange pleasantries and introduce themselves to each other and the round commences. The judge, Ms Apoorva Dixit, has completed her education at HIdayatullah National Law University, Raipur and is currently an assistant professor at Jagran Lakecity University. The host introduces the judge and then lays down the rules of the Second National Mediation Competition, HPNLU. 

10:30 AM The mediator lays down the ground rules for the session and explains the mediation process to the requesting party. He lays emphasises, listening to the other party and respecting each other. The requesting party starts by speaking about the relationship they have with the responding party, he says that the damages that occurred to him are more than just material loss and are more emotional.  The responding party says that they have faith in the mediation process. He talks about rebuilding the relationship and having it back to its full glory. 

10:43 AM The Counsels of both the party lay down the problem of both parties and propose to set the legal issues aside, and have a spirit of good faith partnership for the promising and mutually profitable relationship that it is.  They set the agendas of today’s session and want to preserve the relationship and this is just a roadblock in their relationship.  The Conference session starts. The questioning starts and the responding party starts answering them.  

10:58 AM The discussion goes on. The council requests the mediators to summarise the discussion after he stops speaking for a smoother mediation. The mediator points out that there is a communication gap between the party and he requests for moving on to the Caucas. The responding party asks the requesting party to respond to his questions and sets the atmosphere for the continuance of their relationship in future. 

11:08 AM The responding party’s counsel asks for the medical report not just for the sake of examination but for the concerns of his health. There is a reiteration for having a healthy relationship going ahead. The caucus starts. The mediator suggests that the responding party comes for the caucus first. The responding party gently rejects the caucus due to the paucity of time and for transparency. The requesting party again asks for the caucus and is given 4 minutes of time for the same.

11:19 AM The Caucus ends and the other party joins back. The caucus is being summarised by the mediators and the main conclusion which comes out is that the privacy of both the parties is maintained by both the parties and the mediation should be focused more on future aspects. Both parties agree to the proposal. The responding party proposes the continuation of the contract and to show strength to have promotional gatherings together. A favour of paying 25 per cent amount if the negotiation goes well and the rest would be paid in next 2 years. The proposition of making the Client the brand ambassador of the remaining party. 

11:27 AM The compensation amount is to be discussed and agreed upon later on due to the paucity of time today. The company is ready to pay the hospitalisation charges for a week A proposal of drafting the client as the brand ambassador of other products and drafting a contract similar to that of the NBA Pro League player. 

11:31 AM Conclusion by the parties. The mediators sum up all the ideas discussed in the last 2 minutes of the negotiation. It was a fruitful session and the judge starts speaking. The judge gives her insight into the sessions. Appreciating the mediators for being good team handlers and the suggestions of the same were shared by her. The session concludes with both parties looking forward to the next session. 

Room no. 16 | Team Code 216  v. Team Code 220

10:07 AM The session for Preliminary Rounds-1 starts, the judge, Mr. Harsh Dave is introduced, pleasantries are exchanged and everyone, parties, counsels, and mediators introduce themselves.

10:13 AM A brief overview of the session is given by the mediators and the process is explained to the parties, consent of the parties regarding the commencement of the mediation process is asked and surety of confidentiality is given.

10:24 AM Client, Mr. Stanley who is an NBA player addresses his issues with the respondent company, Energy Whipped Pvt. Ltd. Mr. Stanley explains how he lost his career to the unfortunate incident. The counsel of Mr. Stanley Hudson summarizes the issues of his client. Three main issues were identified – reputational loss to Mr. Stanley due to his non-selection of him in NBA; financial loss faced; health issues that Mr. Stanley had to suffer.

10:32 AM The CEO of Energy Whipped Pvt. Ltd explains the background of its company and the grounds for its issues. The counsel for the company also summarizes the issues regarding the contract which were financial loss due to Mr. Stanley backing out of the contract; loss in brand value and also funding from investors; criticism faced by the company

10:39 AM Discussion by the mediators over the agendas that were key to the dispute arose in the present case, which is- relationship loss, reputational loss, and financial losses faced by both parties.

10:41 AM Mr. Stanley states how he values the relationship between both parties and believes that there is potential to save the relationship and thus, introduces the idea of a new contract that both parties can enter into after making certain adjustments.

10:44 AM Issue over a relationship is somewhat resolved by establishing that both parties wish to remain in the contract either by entering into a new contract or renewing the present contract with medical coverage (expenses) and testing (lists of tests conducted by the company) and also the withdrawal of the batches in the market for time being.

10:52 AM Certain apprehensions are raised by Mr. Stanley regarding the product but the same are resolved and the parties have decided to stay in the contract upon renewed terms.

10:58 AM The issue of reputational loss is being discussed which was faced by both parties. Both parties have decided to settle this matter by issuing a joint public declaration of their willingness to continue in the contract and establishing a manifestation of the bond. Mr. Stanley will again stand as the face of the brand to garner public trust over the brand.

11:0 AM Session for Preliminary Round-1 ends after resolving two out of three key issues at hand and the third issue is left for discussion for the next session.

11:10 AM The Judge, Mr. Harsh Dave gives his comments regarding how the process of mediation is rushed for the purpose of settlement in such competitions which is not the case in real life. All in all, appreciates the conduct of their clients and their ability to fulfil the roles assigned to them. Also appreciated the ability of mediators in explaining the process of mediation and explained how confidentiality is a two-way street and has to be fulfilled by clients as well as the mediators and goes on to say that voluntariness and neutrality are a one-way street.

11:14 AM The session comes to an end.      

     

DAY 2: Preliminary Round 2

Room number 01 | Team Code 209 vs Team Code 225

02:04 PM Greetings to everyone. The mediators outlined the roadmap that will be followed throughout this mediation session in order to make it as advantageous as possible for both parties concerned.

02:08 PM The session continues with the host elaborating on the rules. After this the mediator begins with an opening statement where both the mediators introduce themselves and provide some information about the mediation process. The requesting and responding parties provide an introduction about themselves and have agreed to choose this online mediation table with their certified mediators and have also agreed to be addressed by their respective names. The importance of mediation is addressed briefly after which the mediator asks if parties have ever opted for the same, and reassure the parties they will help them reach an amicable agreement.

02:21 PM Requesting party starts with the opening statement by thanking respondents and mediators for joining the process where they express their intention to reach a mutually agreeable solution. The requesting party highlights why they wanted to acquire their land, where they approached respondents with the utmost respect and on a very positive note, where the requesting party also highlights how their reputation has been tarnished due to defamation charges by the respondents. The respondents make it clear that they want to deliberate on vital issues arising out of these unfavourable circumstances. Further, two items of the agenda for the session are highlighted I.e, to see the instances leading to defamation suits and the second agenda is to discuss future business collaboration.

02:34 PM  Opening session for Agenda 1 starts with the responding party stating that a defamation suit seemed as the best option due to Constant interruptions by requesting party despite clear signals, further causing mental trauma, plus they brought into light the sentimental value of their land holds for them as it’s their ancestral property. The respondents claimed that the Requesting party only focused on the monetary value. Their Claim was further substantiated by the counsel, Where the intention of not selling property was reiterated again. They proposed another idea of Not selling but willing to lease it for 99 years, Where the solution can mutually benefit both parties.

02:45 PM Respondents highlight what their intention was before filing suit. No bad intention was intended in the first place. Their neighbours were Also being bothered. Further, the intention to issue a Common public statement was appreciated. Also, Another proposal was made to organise a Private meeting with investors to confirm collaboration, as wanted by requesting party. Finally, the Solution was that a Joint public statement is to be issued.

02:51 PM Parties move on to the second agenda. Before that, responding parts Requests for a caucus. The responding party highlights their apprehension about not being given suitable reasons for use of land by the respondent. They Want surety that the right profit is being given to them considering the high profitability the land holds. The responding party Agrees to negotiation when it comes to the amount. However, Clarification about profit was sought by the mediator. The respondents highlighted that they are willing to continue with selling, given that market value is the fair and reasonable profit of the entire project received by all families (neighbours).

03:05 PM Move ahead to the 2nd Agenda where requesting party highlights that they are willing to deliberate on the proposal. Review offers are considered after deliberation. Requesting party Offers 70 per cent property at market value and Offers 30 per cent as a secure creditor in township project where the respondents can retain the entire floor. Additional benefits like Free usage of common areas like pool play areas are proposed with respect to collaboration. The mediator highlights the proposals of the requesting party and they Agree on proposals made by the requesting party. Amount stated agreed to, secure credit also appreciated. Hence, the Proposal is agreed to by the respondent. Negotiations happen. Another proposal was made by the respondent on which requesting party is silent. The parties Still have not agreed to the profit part, resulting in Friction between them related to the issue. Caucus is then requested. Due to the paucity of time, it doesn’t take place. The profit part is to be discussed later.

03:09 PM Today’s session concluded although consensus couldn’t be formed on the other agenda. But the 2 agendas were discussed. Closing statements made by requesting party first, grateful about the fact that they could agree on at least 1 agenda. Both parties agreed on some issues. All of them concluded that it was a Fruitful discussion. Meditators were thanked For their flexible approach.

03:21 PM Our esteemed guest is invited to give feedback to participants where he Highlighted the importance of reality-testing by mediators. He also advised Dividing the opening statements equally by mediators. Certain mistakes were highlighted and he advised both the parties to be extremely careful while making offers and statements.

03:22 PM– Closing statement by the host. The Session was concluded.

Room number 02 | Team Code 210 vs Team Code 227

02:12 PM  Greetings to one and all. The session begins with the mediators deliberating as to what will be the roadmap undertaken throughout the course of this Mediation session for it to be most beneficial for both parties involved.

02:18 PM The parties and the judge enter the room. The host provides a brief introduction of our esteemed judge for the session Mrs. Sonal Kharbanda. The pleasantries are exchanged and introductions of the parties begin with smiles across all faces. The mediators highlight the importance of their role in facilitating the conversation that would lead the parties to an amicable resolution of the dispute. Now, we are all set to begin with what we are hoping would be a productive round of mediation.

02:23 PM  The Mediators open the floor for mediation. The mediator starts with the session and the agenda is about the Construction of a company. Now questions are as follows:-

-In regards to the nature of actions taken to obtain land rights and what can be done in the same.

-In regards to the damages claimed due to losses, both reputation and finances suffered by all parties.

-Future disputes redressal mechanisms of choice.

02:50 PM Now call for a caucus. The counsel for energy whipped elaborates on the same for the satisfaction of the requesting party.

02:58 PM – The parties enter a caucus session and are informed about the caucus’s confidential aspect.The parties put forth their sides without any hesitation and fear of the information being disclosed to the other party.

03:06 PM – The joint session begins in regard to the market value.

03:10 PM – The mediators wrap up the session by congratulating the parties for such a fruitful session. With the hopes of meeting again for another session to further discuss the remaining issues with the same enthusiasm, the mediation round comes to an end.

03:14 PM – Our respected judge is giving the feedback to the mediators first, on how to efficiently direct the parties to reach an amicable settlement. The parties are congratulated for being tactful at handling the surprises being thrown at them by the opposite side. I am sure everyone gained a lot by hearing the feedback from our esteemed judge.

Room Number 03 | Team Code 211 v Team Code 231

02:23 PM Greetings! All the participants representing different parties have arrived. The host greets the judge and all the participants and provides them with the rules and regulations of the competition.

02: 25 PM Mediators are introducing themselves to the room. The mediators now ask the parties to introduce themselves. Bob Construction Pvt. Ltd. and the Vivek Oberoi with their respective counsels introduce themselves to each other.

02: 28 PM The mediator 227 explains the healthy benefits of the mediation over the long heft process of litigation and he further explains how this session of mediation will proceed. The mediator again emphasizes the benefits of mediation and explains what will be the roles of the mediators in this session of mediation.

02: 34 PM The mediators ask the requesting party that is Bob Construction Pvt. Ltd. to introduce themselves and start with the session. Bob Construction Pvt. Ltd. and its counsel introduces themselves and begins with the background of the current problem they are facing for which they are coming for this session of mediation. They also explain how their following project is very important and how damage to their reputation affected investments, finances, and so on. Furthermore, they want to work it out with the other party and continue with the contract process.

02: 43 PM The mediator summarises the requesting party and asks Vivek Oberoi and his counsel to introduce themselves and start with the session. Vivek Oberoi and his counsel introduce themselves and begin to talk about their side of the story of the problem and explain their agendas.

02: 47 PM The counsel of the respondent party explains their agenda. The mediator summarises the whole talk and sets the agenda for the party that is regarding reputational loss, land problems, and finances.

02: 49 PM The requesting party now starts with their point and explains how they want to continue with the contract. The responding party explains how the land is their ancestral property and they agree to find a solution for it and they agree to work with the contract but only on some concrete assurance.

02:53 PM The requesting party explains to the other party how they want to compensate them for the land on the basis of the market value.

02:54 PM Vivek Oberoi agrees with the statement of the other party and asks them about what are they willing to offer. The mediator summarises the whole argument of both parties.

02: 56 PM The requesting party explains how they want a joint agreement and joint statement in the media and an agreement where the other party is willing to work together and there was no problem with the land issue. Further, Vivek apologies for the actions of her sister, and he further explains how other people are cutting ties with them

02:59 PM  Bob Construction Pvt. Ltd. asks for a caucus session and everyone agrees to it and the caucus session begins. The mediators explained the rules of the caucus session to both parties separately. Bob Construction Pvt. Ltd. explains the fact that they lack finances due to damage to their reputation and they were willing to provide the Oberois accordingly. Then, the responding party comes and explains the monetary value they want for the sale of their land.

03:15 PM – The caucus session gets over and the discussion begins. The mediators put out the point about the sale o the land. Bob Construction Pvt. Ltd. places the offer that they are willing to give the opposite party fifty per cent of the land value with a flat for the Oberois and also give a priority to them for the investment in their construction project and accommodate that for the same. The condition is that the opposite party will take back their work of defamation publicly and back the other neighbours for the positive side of the project.

03: 21 PM– Vivek Oberoi agrees on the point of going for a joint statement and the word of the requesting party. The requesting party further agrees to it. The financial agreement has been left for another session.

03:23 PM– The mediators summarize the whole session regarding the public joint statement and both parties agree on the sales of the land for the construction. At last, today’s session for mediation ends on a positive note.

Room number 04 | Team Code 205 v Team Code 226

02:05 PM Hello and Good afternoon! The parties have introduced themselves and exchanged pleasantries. The host introduces the judge, Mr Digant Mishra, a graduate of MNLU Mumbai and currently a legal associate. The mediators have discussed a strategy for reaching an amicable solution.

02:11 PM Mediator lays down the ground rules for the mediation session to resolve the conflict amicably.CEO of the construction company, requesting party, begins with the opening remarks. The Client provides brief information about the construction company. The Client wishes to sell the land at a fair market price. In addition, he says that the actions of the responding party hampered the company’s goodwill and resulted in the threat of the investors. The responding party further describes how the requesting party defamed the company and falsely accused the employee. The legal Counsel advises dealing with the issue with mediation. 

02:18 PM Counsel for the requesting party begins to propose possible solutions and describes the monetary losses the company has suffered. Discussion of the agendas begins with the requesting party wanting ten crores as compensation for defamation and renegotiating the sale deed in future.

02:26 PM The responding party decides to sell the land based on negotiation terms. The requesting party states that the land is the core definition of life and holds sentimental value. Additionally, she contends that repeatedly rejected proposals for land purchase are the crux and the bone of contention. The company’s employer knocking on every day became harassment for the responding party. Disputes arise when the Client(responding party) refuses to purchase the land at a fair price. Meanwhile, The Mediator suggests going into the caucus session and reaching a positive solution.

02:36 PM Mediator discusses the three Agendas 1. Defamation suit 2. Mutual intention regarding the property 3. Compensation for harassment.CEO of the construction company clears his intentions. Counsel for the company answers the question of the responding party.

02:43 PM The responding party decides to move into the caucus. However, requesting party chooses to delay. The parties are going in circles. Until now, Nobody has proposed a solution.

02:52 PM With the end of the caucus, the requesting party reveals the confidential information round.   The responding party agrees to the condition to take back their words and quash the defamation suit. The parties set their agendas for the next session. The requesting party would like to discuss the sale deed and contract in future sessions. 

03:00 PM At the end of the session, The honourable judge gives feedback to the participants. The judge praises the parties for handling the issue tactfully. Further, he directs them to maintain politeness, keep their language positive, and refrain from using negative words while talking to the parties. He wishes all the best to the parties for their future agendas and congratulates them for participating.

Room 16 | Team Code 201 v. Team Code 230

02:00 PM  The round begins with the arrival of the judge and the participants. They exchange pleasantries and introduce themselves to each other. The mediator makes both parties comfortable by making them aware of the rules of the mediation session and ensuring them that they all are going to be heard no matter what.

02:03 PM Mr. Alex, MD of bob construction is the client and James is the counsel and TC230 Vivek is the client and Sarais the counsel. Mediator made the parties aware of the rules and made the participants comfortable.

02:10 PM Mr. Alex gave his opening statement. Bob construction company is a very reputed engineering company. According to him there is some misunderstanding between the party, and now stakeholders are threatening them and their reputation has also declined in the market due to this. TC 201 wants to settle down the land dispute and is looking forward to a solution, counsel is providing the statements, personal stakes are high in the issue, and Bob construction wants a smooth settlement.

02:20 PM Bob construction majorly wants a settlement on these issues, they want to settle the land dispute and false and unreasonable harassment claim against them and want to come to a resolution. The mediator is portraying the issues clearly among the parties. The issue is that there is some land dispute between parties and parties want an amicable settlement. There is a loss of goodwill of the parties because of the claims of both parties’ compensation for the defamation suit. 

02:23 PM  The other party Mr. Vivek the head of the Oberoi family and doesn’t want to sell their land. And his counsel gave facts and presented his side of the dispute.  The council is providing technical viewpoints on the issue. They want to resolve the issue and the party is ready to compromise and will sell the land if paid more and will withdraw the defamation suit and will give a joint statement regarding the issue.

02:34 PM TC 201 provides the new terms of providing the new residential place.

02:38 PM TC230 is ready to sell the land but only at a higher price, and this condition would be kept private. They don’t want the new property and will not change the name of the property. The mediator is clarifying the terms.

02:48 PM TC230 asked for the private caucus. TC230 is discussing its terms with the mediator. They are ready to sell the property but at a higher price, as they are going through financial difficulties.

02:54 PM TC201 is ready to dismiss the defamation suit, and just wants a joint statement for dispute settlement. Bob construction is not ready to give the higher price.

03:01 PM Both parties are fixed on their terms. They want to pass the land dispute to the next session. TC230  is ready to give the joint statement.

03:05 PM Judge is providing the judgment, mediators were advised to not stretch the session. Judge questioned mediators why the mediators rejected the demand of the caucus at first. Mediators are clarifying. Mediators are provided with feedback by the judge. Parties are provided with positive feedback by the judge. Judge is providing her views on the entire mediation round. 

03:10 PM The host expressed a vote of thanks to the judge, the mediators and the parties involved in the mediation

Room 15| Team Code 202 v. Team Code 2

02:05 PM The round beings with the arrival of judge Ms. AISHWARYA DOBHAL and negotiators. Pleasantries and introductions are exchanged and the host expressed a vote of thanks to the judges and made them aware of the following instructions to the negotiators for the mediation competition.

02:09 PM Mediators and council start a talk about their dispute between BOB CONSTRUCTION V/S VIVEK OBEROI.

02:14 PM All parties opening their statements firstly, TC 2O2 -bob construction in which the client s. Elizabeth stated that in their construction business they are facing certain restrictions in that then, the counsel Mr Rockefeller stated two points the first one to make a deal to buy their ancestral land and the second one, how can we help each other in making their loss to regain

02:23 PM The other party named TC 228  – Vivek Oberoi’s client and council gave their thoughts to the other party. The client – Vivek argues on their deal  for their land acquisition by bob construction while he refers to his counsel christ  hence, she clears the client’s thoughts and asks mediators to look into the matter

02:29 PM TC -228 ask for the caucus to talk to mediators in which the client Vivek Oberoi opens up about how they are in crisis due to their land acquisition and how his sister backstabbed her and then counsel asks for some certain steps to help them in these problems.

02: 35 PM Oberoi’s wants a joint development agreement  with bob’s construction regarding their land

02:40 PM TC -202 tells how they are using their land and what benefits they will provide to the other party like – they will make a  complex for the persons from whom they have agreed to take their land and asks them to be a part of this good deal. As the complexes are at the centre of the city.

02:45 PM In favour of the offer made by TC 202 the other parties reply that they are not ok with their proposal and want some other sought-off profit. They want 3 of 6 complexes which will be made by them as they mentioned. If you sell any property then they get  60% of the profit.

02:48 PM TC -202 ask for the caucus to talk to mediators about their problems regarding the statement made by the other parties.

02:58 PM TC 202 raised a question about whether they are protecting their financial interest.

03:00 PM Bob construction made one more deal with Oberoi’s that they will give them a complex and with the complex, they will give some revenue which they are getting from their other successful works. Hence, the other parties don’t accept the favour given by them.

03:05 PM The negotiators and mediators sum up their mediation session with a fruitful meaning and wish to talk about it sooner in the future.

03:08 PM The judge gives their feedback. She included that the mediation session is one of the good ones heard till now. She tells them about their mistakes and corrects them. She adds that after the caucus of one party the mediators have to instantly call up one more session with the other party. And the main point which is defamation the parties and mediators don’t talk about it. They have to do it as it’s the main point of the mediation session.

03:15 PM The host gives the vote of thanks to the participants and to the judges and the session ends on a good note.

DAY 2: QUARTER-FINALS

Room number 1 | Team Code 204 v. Team Code 228

06:18 PM Greetings! All the participants representing different parties have arrived. The host greets the judge and all the participants and provides them with the rules and regulations of the competition.

06: 20 PM The mediators begin by introducing themselves and ask both the parties Verstappen Pvt. Ltd. and Leclerc Inc. with their representatives to introduce themselves and greet each other and they do so.

06: 23 PM The mediators explain the healthy benefits of mediation and how it is better than the long and hefty litigation process. The mediators also explain the rules and regulations and how the following session will proceed. They also describe their roles in this session of mediation and tell both parties to be respectful to each other.

06:30 PM The mediators ask Verstappen Pvt. Ltd. to start the discussion by explaining their problems. Verstappen Pvt. Ltd. and its counsel explain the background of the problem, regarding using the opposite party’s stamp, for which they have come up with a resolution. They also explain how they want to mutually benefit the other party and find a solution to the problem and further they want to have strong future relations with each other.

06:37 PM The mediators ask Leclerc Inc. to start the discussion by explaining their problem. Leclerc Inc. and its counsel explain the background of the problem, regarding charging for stamps used by the other party and the finances related to the movie, for which they have come up with a resolution. They also explain how there was trademark infringement and they want damages through the other party. There also explains that they want to continue with the contract and have strong future relations.

06:42 PM Mediator 2 summarises the discussion and the problems put up by both parties. The main concern is regarding the unauthorized use of stamps and both parties need a solution for it. Mediator 1 briefs the agenda and tells about taking corrective measure regarding certificates, and trademark infringement and agree with the terms of the current agreement.

06:55 PM The mediators mentions the problem of trademark infringement and gave a point of discussion to the session. Leclerc Inc. tells that they want sixty lacs as damages. The counsel for Verstappen Pvt. Ltd. tells and explains how it was a mutual agreement and they agree that they were wrong on their part. Further, he explains the finances and where such finances were used. Counsel for Leclerc Inc. tells the other party how the said finances by the other party are not normal. The counsel for Verstappen Pvt. Ltd. agrees with the other party and offers fifteen lacs as compensation.

07:05 PM Leclerc Inc. explains the fact that it was their film and the other party just
modified it. The other party explains the fact that both the parties have gained through
the money and further explains that they themselves promoted the movie.

07:07 PM Mediator 2 summarizes the whole discussion by both parties. Verstappen Pvt. Ltd. offers thirty lacs and five lacs more regarding module distribution. The counsel for Leclerc Inc. explains the fact that they have received financial losses and need sixty lacs.

The other party agrees to it and asks Verstappen Pvt. Ltd. for having contracts that are in relation to the movies that Verstappen Pvt. Ltd. is making. Leclerc Inc.’s counsel further explains how they have financial limits since they are an upcoming new startup. They further propose module and education videos that will help the other party with their problem of international relations and ads will run in those videos through which fifty per cent profit distribution and further explained the exchange of finances to their proposition. The mediators summarize the discussion regarding finances and the offer provided by both parties.

07:18 PM Leclerc Inc. explains their point that how the other party has international assets and the other party wants all their movies and this would affect their international ties and disagrees with the proposal. Verstappen Pvt. Ltd. clarifies the fact that they just want movies related to the Netherlands. Leclerc Inc.’s counsel explains that the compensation is regarding the present problem and not regarding future deals and they want sixty lacs as damages. The counsel for Verstappen Pvt. Ltd. explains that they want to pay sixty lacs and they want strong relations in the future. He also explains how they want engagement to the terms of the agreement with regard to other proposals in addition to sixty lacs.

07:30 PM Mediator 2 comes in between and tells both the parties that the discussion is going round the circles and they must come to the point of mentioned agenda. Mediator 1 asks both parties to sum up their discussion due to lack of time. Both parties agree on the fact that the solution to the problem is to be discussed in the next mediation session due to lack of time.

07:32 PM The mediators summarize and conclude today’s session of mediation. They also explain the problem to be discussed in the next session of mediation. The mediators conclude the session and end it on a positive note.

07:36 PM The judge gave his positive remarks for the following session. He also gave his critiques to both parties about where they were wrong and what is the right decorum of a mediation session. Questions and answers between judges and the participants took place. At last, he praised the participants for their roles and their action in the following session and further blessed them for future progress. Later, personal feedback was also given by the judge to the participants.

Room number 2 | Team Code 226 v. Team Code 230

06:21 PM Welcome everyone! Judges have arrived and have taken their seats. The host started the meeting with a brief introduction of the judges and also a briefing on the rules of the competition and commenced the mediation session.

06:23 PM The parties TC 225, and TC 232 Mediators introduced themselves and shared a few words with the parties.

06:25 PM The responding and the requesting party introduced themselves and gave the agendas on which they will be negotiating in the mediation process.

06:26 PM Mediators TC 232 and TC 225 gave a small brief about the mediation process what it is really about, how it works, the advantages of the mediation and negotiation process, and how it helps us in resolving issues. And the basic ethics and practices to be used during the whole mediation process.

06:35 PM The parties TC 226 started discussing the agenda by going back on how the whole matter was started and what lead the parties to come to a single table for resolving the issue. Verstappen started by apologizing for the grave mistake they made because of which Leclerc had to suffer the international backlash from the partners they are allied with and the damage it did to their reputation internationally. And further clarified that all the certificates issued cannot be taken back keeping in mind that the certificate will be redesigned and a special clip of 10 sec will be played prior to giving the certificate. The first agenda put up was to continue the contract and discuss the further prospects and working of both the companies together.

06:41 PM TC 230 Started by thanking them for the success of the movie worldwide and accepts the apology by Verstappen. The Counsel again reinstates the issue of the use of the logo by the party without their permission as their international collaboration makes the matter worse as it bars them from entering into contracts. The TC 230 demanded a public formal apology and let the international organizations know that the allegation against them are not that solid and was a misconception. As the international organization demands a public apology and any kind of informal apology will not be accepted.

06:45 PM TC 226 Told that both the parties are on the same board as of now and the mediation is about easing the problem. The mediator asked for summoning the agendas about a formal apology, and compensation and asked to mutually agree about notification in which the clerical staff bears the
whole liability about its mistake and put it out in public.

06:50 PM TC 230 asked for a caucus session and the mediators agree and move further with the caucus session TC 226 leaves the meeting on demand of secrecy.

06:51 PM TC 230 told the mediator that they agree to issue a joint notification addressing the international organization by using soft words so that the purpose of a public apology can be accomplished without damaging their own reputation and the reputation of the other party. Something close to an apology that may satisfy the international organization and the media.

06:55 PM The parties joint the session again after the discussion made in the caucus.

06:57 PM TC 226 counsel offered to give some compensation as per the demand of the other party
and make the proposal of going with the notification request. The mediators asked the other parties to take the caucus and shared the information that
was discussed in the caucus with (TC 226) to (TC 230).

06:59 PM TC 226 Decides not to give a straightforward public apology as it will affect their image as the media may make the matter worse and lead to a dip in their future contractual

07:02 PM The private caucus is closed and the respective parties join the mediation session again the mediator explains how both the parties came to a joint notification as it will be close to a formal apology and the terms that have to be included in the notification.

07:05 PM TC 226 Decides to take responsibility and came to a consensus for the joint notification on the date of 1 Oct on which the notification is proposed to be released in the public domain and further asked about the amount of compensation to be paid. As both parties are fine with the notification they further discussed the future of their partnership. Both parties are fine with the notification as a gesture of kindness.

07:10 PM TC 226 Further the contract is not broken and they will continue to work together. They also discussed the release of their upcoming 5 movies.

07:15 PM The initial contract is up for the future and the future movies will be shown on the same platform as it was before and the certificate will be distributed without the logo of the other company.

07:17 PM They further explain the licensing capacity and the way they are going to work together.

07:20 PM The proposal for licensing the 5 upcoming movies will be sent soon.

07:21 PM TC 232 mediator appreciated the way both the parties came to a mutual understanding when asked for any further questions both the parties denied and they further moved to conclude the session.

07:23 PM The parties have come to a consensus that they have come to agreeable terms on the points that they had delineated in the agenda and expressed their pleasure at getting the fruits out of the negotiation session.

07:30 PM The session was concluded and the judges gave their review of what they found positive and negative in the mediation process both the parties shared warm appreciation towards each other and appreciated the efforts made by them the judges gave some tips to the team of the responding and requesting and concluded the mediation on a warm note.

Room number 3 | Team Code 208 v. Team Code 214

06:00 PM The participants are joining in and waiting for the judges to arrive.

06:13 PM The judges are joining the session, and the host has requested a few extra minutes for the remaining participants to join in.

06:18 PM The session is now in full swing, with the host giving gratitude to the respected judges and the participants and giving the guidelines for the mediation competition.

06:20 PM The mediator explains the pillar of mediation, asks the participants to introduce themselves, makes them feel comfortable, and makes them aware of the rules and process of mediation. They talk about the caucus and the unbiasedness of the session, and the mediator asks for ground rules for the session from the participants, and one of them says that one ground rule should be that there should be no overspeaking.

06:28 PM The requesting team starts heating the session by stating their facts and concerns. The client begins by saying his issues and willingness to come to a conclusion benefitting both sides. The council then takes over, and further states his client’s point. The requesting party is a multinational company. The first issue displayed is the dissolution of the contract’s cobranding and license agreement term. The second issue is bout getting access to the upcoming movies of the responding team.

06:30 PM the mediator then starts to state the facts that have been derived from the statement given by the requesting team

06:38 PM the responding team then begins to give their response, and they thank the requesting team for requesting mediation and not asking for litigation, as it would’ve been more trouble. Further, they start to state their views and respond to the requesting team’s issues.

06:48 PM The mediators again state the facts and issues and write down the main agendas for the
session:
– Nature of the agreement and damages
– Future relations

06:53 PM the responding section says the damages are caused due to the cobranding, and no credit is given. And they ask for compensation, i.e. one crore rupees, to settle the injuries they have suffered, and they shall keep the contract

06:58 PM The mediator summarizes the argument and brings out the points given by the team.

07:00 PM The requesting unit said that due negligence was there from the other party and was not entirely their mistake. and how their company goodwill is also lost, not just the other party

07:04 PM The responding team says this is not a blame game and wants compensation only for the damages that have occurred.

07:06 PM  A caucus is called. The responding team says that the second agenda is what they’re focusing on more. They accept the mistake that has been done on their part. They are looking for a settlement and they want to balance the compensation. They feel there is a creative compensation instead of the one crore. They will allow more film projects to the requesting team.

07:10 PM The mediator takes in all the information and asks if she can disclose the information given by the party and the responding party says that they only want to tell their decision to the other party if they agree to a common understanding.

07:14 PM The responding team’s caucus time is ending and the requesting team’s caucus is starting, and they disclose that they are open to lowering the compensation amount to 80 lakhs, and are open to collaborating on new projects and that they want to cooperate.

07:16 PM The mediator asks if the responding team wants any other than monetary compensation, but they reject that offer, saying that they have to pay the international clients w. The latter is at a loss due to the issues.

07:20 PM The caucus for both teams has ended. mediator starts clarifying that both the party wants to continue to cooperate and wants the teams to work it t. The mediator discloses the requests and ideas given by the teams

07:22 PM The responding team has concluded, ready to give in to the new project collaboration offer, and the licencing fees will go higher.

07:25 PM The requesting team wants to be collaborative and find a middle solution and is open to the idea of paying higher licencing fees. The requesting unit says they cannot give a final answer on the compensation as the decision is o only thanks to the company directors.

07:30 PM The responding team says that they are ready for this quasi-agreement but want a date when they shall tell them correctly when the compensation will be given. The requesting unit says they will let the actual amount be known in the next session because many board directors have to be asked.

07:35 PM The time is up, and both sides have brought in the talk about another session because they want to continue the partnership. The mediator concludes the session by bringing in the information that they have collected from the session. The mediator asks for feedback. The responding team thanks the party and the mediator. The mediation ended on a very wholesome note with both teams appreciating each other.

07:37 PM The host asks for feedback from our judge. The judge gives advice and points out how the session could’ve been better, what should’ve been asked, and how the mediators should’ve operated. The second judge gives her ideas and opinions, advice, and general points to the teams. And says that she will provide her with per provider participants who have more queries

07:50 PM The host concludes the session on a cordial note by thanking all the participants and judges for taking out some of their valuable time and being a part of the competition.

Room number 4 | Team code 232 v. Team code 219

06:15 PM The session host gave the guidelines as to how the mediation session is to be conducted.

06:17 PM The mediators commenced the session by laying the ground rules.

06:18 PM The session moved further with the mediator giving the opening statement wherein he introduced himself. The parties then introduced themselves. The mediator then asked the parties subject to mediation as to their capability/ authority to be a party to any agreement reached through the process of mediation.

06:20 PM The presiding mediator then described the nuances of mediation proceedings. He also described the various stages of the mediation process. He then emphasized the importance of privacy regarding details of the mediation proceedings and requested both parties not to engage in any sort of communication during the mediation proceedings.

06:26 PM The requesting and responding parties then gave their introduction and opening statements. The requesting party happened to be a startup multinational education institute. After the client of the requesting party gave the basic details of the issue into consideration, the requesting party’s counsel laid some ground rules for the opposing party’s counsel and then proceeded with the legal issue.

06:34 PM The requesting party’s counsel stated the agendas of the mediation session. In a nutshell, the main two agendas were as follows:
1. In regards to the nature of cobranding and licensing and what can be done in the same.
2. In regards to damages claimed due to losses both of reputation and finances suffered by all parties.
3. Potential for future collaborative projects.

06:36 PM The responding party started to give their introduction. In the meanwhile, the mediator paused the session due to internet issues faced by the co-mediator. Then the client of the responding party stated her side of the incident.

06:43 PM The counsel of the responding party then introduced himself and called to the attention of the mediators the fact that this was his client’s first mediation proceedings. He reiterated the fact that the opposing party cannot use their logo without his client’s express permission as it was a registered trademark. He then stated his party’s agenda for the session. Their agenda was in consonance with that of the requesting party.

06:53 PM The mediator paused the time of the proceedings because of internet issues faced by the co-mediator.

06:55 PM The requesting party rebutted some statements made by the opposing party previously. They also stated that a part of the issue was the fact that the responding party kept the contract secretive in nature and did not attract investments from private parties. The responding party gave a rebuttal for the previous statement and brought to the attention that this was not a part of the issue. They then stated that the issue was regarding co-branding rather than investments.

06:59 PM The co-mediator interjected and restated the ground rules for the session. She restricted the parties from using unparliamentary language and acts.

07:02 PM The requesting party’s counsel stated the legal technicalities of the issue. They stated that the compensation of INR 60 lakh rupees from the responding party was fair.

07:07 PM The client of the responding party clarified some issues with the counsel of the requesting party. She also provided rebuttals to some statements made by the counsel of the opposing party.

07:10 PM The mediator paused the session due to technical issues faced by the requesting party’s client.

07:12 PM The requesting party’s client rejoined the session and then went on to provide supporting statements to answer the questions raised by the client of the responding party.

07:14 PM The counsel took responsibility for his decision of printing logos which posed an issue for the opposing party.

07:16 PM The responding party’s counsel along with the mediator stated that the session would be more beneficial if the parties could work towards a solution.

07:24 PM The responding party felt that they had a creative solution in mind and went on to state the same. The requesting party had some issues regarding this solution and tried to make some changes so as to come to an amicable solution.

07:26 PM The requesting party stated that they will take down the logos of the opposing party from the further batches with the ongoing contract continuing as it is right now. Also, they were willing to make good some losses suffered by the opposing party.

07:28 PM The client of the responding party reiterated that they wanted some part of the amount right then and the rest could be worked upon later on. Both parties tried to reach a common solution upon which both could agree.

07:32 PM The requesting party stated that they were willing to compensate the opposing party to an amount which was below INR 40 lakhs cap and in return, they were willing to invest in the future endeavours of the company.

07:33 PM The co-mediator interjected and requested both parties to summarize their statements and provide their closing statements.

07:35 PM Both parties provided their closing statements. The requesting party’s counsel stated that they were nearing a possible solution and hoped that they would be able to do so in future sessions.

07:40 PM The co-mediator then went on to summarize the session and points out the fact that the
session had gone in a very convenient and amicable manner.

07:44 PM The presiding judge then went on to provide his valuable insights on the session. He congratulated the teams for their positive response to mediation and applauded the fact that the parties had set the agenda for the next session.

07:55 PM The session host then concluded the session on a positive note.

DAY 3 | SEMI-FINALS

Room number 01 | Team Code 204 v. Team Code 214

10:05 AM The much anticipated day is finally here! Beginning with the Semi-Finals and with the Finals scheduled for later today, today it promises to be jam-packed with a captivating mediation session

10:15 AM The air is brimming with nervous excitement and the participants are on edge as the semi-final rounds have begun.

10:17 AM Greetings! All the participants representing different parties have arrived. The host is greeting all the participants and briefed them about the rules of the competition. 

10:19 AM  The parties and the judge enter the room. The host welcomed the parties. The host provides a brief introduction of our esteemed judges Mr. Jasbir Bajaj who is the director at BE N BY IAS, Meena Waghray who is the founder, and mediator out of court.in and Sravan Unnam who is head of HAC. for the session. The pleasantries are exchanged and introductions of the parties begin with smiles across all faces. The mediators highlight the importance of their role in facilitating the conversion that would lead the parties to an amicable resolution of the dispute. And the host here explains the rules and regulations to both parties. Now, we are all set to begin with what we are hoping would be a productive round of mediation. Here we go!

10:23 AM TC 220 Mediator explaining the issue and process of mediation. The Mediator explains that the mediator explains about facilitating the parties and about their confidentiality and neutrality towards both parties. TC 220 mediator introduces himself and explains the basic rules of mediation and the process that is going to be followed in the session.

10:30 AM The Client for requesting party gives its opening statement and explains about their company, functioning, manufacturing and marketing of the company. The counsel(204) gives a brief about their issue. The counsel thanked both the parties for coming to an amicable solution and mediators. He explains that the counsel is here only for legal assistance. And proposed three agendas from requesting party, 1st is dealing with the dispute in leasing properties and lending spaces to cc’s competitors. 2nd about global proposals to help cc realise its global potential. 3rd is to alternate to dilution of equity.

10:40 AM TC 214 gives their opening statements the client from the responding party thanked both the parties and mediators for providing assistance in resolving the issue and facilitating the party to reach an amicable solution. Then client 214 explains the issues that are faced by their company in the covid situation and put their concerns to the other party. The counsel for the responding party thanks to mediators as well as requesting party for coming to reach to amicable solution despite having poor health. Then addresses the agendas of the requesting party. 

10:53 AM Both the mediator explains the agendas to both parties in simple language. 

10:55 AM The counsel explains about financial crunches that their client faced during the covid time. 

11:00 AM Counsel 204 gives some clarifications on the proposals that are proposed by the responding party and also clarifies the losses their client faced during the pandemic and gives some proposals. The client for the 204 takes the issue for further clarification and gives some proposals.

11:08 AM The mediator 227 explains and summarises what the responding party has proposed. 

11:12 AM The responding party gives some clarifications on the issues of equity liquidation that are mentioned earlier. 

11:13 AM  the requesting party comes to negotiate with the responding party on the issues of interest rate and equity liquidation. The responding party explains the past and present valuation of the company. And proposed some offers to the requesting party. 

11:15 AM Mediator 220 explains the offers that were proposed by the responding party.

11:17 AM The counsel from requesting party mentions considering the proposals of the responding for further session. 

11.18 AM Both Mediators summarise the problems and proposals that are given by both parties and lead the session to further issues. 

11:20 AM The responding party explains the terms and technicalities that were there in the contract and demands damages that the responding party suffered during the pandemic, and also some structural changes. 

11.23 AM  Mediator explains the technicalities and terms proposed by the response about damages and some structural adjustments.

11:25 AM The requesting party proposes some other offer instead of giving damages, and to take charges of the company and proposes for switching of ownership. 

11.32 AM  The mediator explains what issues both the parties have raised and briefed them about suggestions and proposals made by both parties. 

11:35 AM  The requesting party finally comes to the closing statement and explains and proposed some offers that are beneficial to both parties, that is to be discussed in future sessions also mentions making progress in further sessions also to bring some innovative ideas. The responding party comes to the closing statement and mentions the expectations for future sessions and thanks both the mediators and the other party for coming to an amicable solution. 

11.40 AM  Both the mediators summarised what were the agendas and the offers proposed by both parties. And thanks to both the parties for respecting the settlement gives wishes for the future session.

11.44 AM The judges are asked for their feedback and acknowledged and give appreciation to all of the participants. And mentions that the mediator’s role is to facilitate but the mediators intervene intake the matter further, also judges mentioned the role of mediators and explain the caucus session where parties can put their concerns privately. At last, the judges said that the participants were great at their session. 

Room 2 | Team Code 226 v. Team Code  219

10:28 AM Greetings to one and all! The session started with the host giving a welcome note to the judges and the participants. We are honoured to have Ms Prachi Mehta who is a founder and Managing Partner at TAG-The ADR Group, Ms Ekta Bahl, an accredited mediator at SIMI and finally  Mr. Mohd. Humdhan is an accredited arbitrator with an LLM qualification in Construction law, Arbitration and Adjudication. 

10:34 AM The session continues with the host elaborating on the rules. After this, the mediator begins with an opening statement wherein  Mediator 209 introduces himself and provides some information about the process of mediation and requests the parties to introduce themselves as well. The session further continues with the Responding and Requesting parties doing the same where they agree to facilitate this process by certified mediators. The basics of the mediation process are covered along with its features. Mediator 209 assures parties of confidentiality.  It is also clarified that the decisions shall be non-binding unless specified otherwise. The role of mediators is explained succinctly. 

10:41 AM Mediator 232 starts by appreciating both parties for choosing mediation over the conventional dispute redressal process.  Further, the parties are encouraged to be open-minded, comfortable, and accepting and to articulate their part of the story in the most lucid manner,  after which the items of the agenda shall be set, with the consensus of all parties.  The Structure of the mediation process is set. Few ground rules are clarified by mediator 209. 

10:46 AM Requesting party begins the discussion with an opening statement, where she thanks the mediators for their illustrative explanation.  Furthermore, they give a brief about their company, Label Food Inc and highlight the deal signed between Label Food and Coffee Culture.  The technicalities of the contractual terms are highlighted, where an exclusivity contract with CC was signed. Problems faced by the requesting party is brought into light where they felt alienated in tier 3 cities. They sense a breach of trust and disloyalty by CC. The agenda for the day is set-  Agenda 1- The current situation and the events leading to unfavourable circumstances. Agenda 2 – Future relationship and opportunities.  

10:54 AM Responding parts start with an opening statement. Gives brief about the company when it started business in 2016 and is growing steadily. Admires the work of label company and would want to follow their footsteps. 21 per cent liquidity diluted by them,  and are under a  debt of 2 crores. Expanded business in tier 3 cities. Some outlets shut down in some cities due to covid pandemic. Force Majeure clause invoked by CC. No intention to explicitly not lease land from the label company.  They claimed that they Had to maintain profits in tier 3 cities despite the difficulties and further Explained their side of the story. They clarified that they had no intention to exclude or make them feel alienated. Simple interest compound interest differences are highlighted here. No breach of an exclusivity contract. But the principle breach made here as relation not respected. Wants to clear the air. And express their desire to enhance and continue this relationship further. 

11:04 AM The responding party explains his role and clarifies that he is strictly in an advisory capacity. Points out details and agenda that he would like to discuss. Further, Highlights the intention to extend the partnership internationally also. Agenda 1 and 2 were made. The responding party further asks open-ended questions. Wants to know the necessity for a joint public statement and wants to know how many countries requesting party operates. 

11:11 AM Questions addressed by requesting party. Want to understand their state of mind and current financial status to continue relations further.  They want to know what business direction the responding party is headed towards. They also want to know the agenda from the responding party for purchasing land in tier 3 cities. Due to paucity of time. The mediator interrupts and asks both parties to streamline the process. 

11:17 AM Floor for negotiations open. Parties are asked to adhere to the items of the agenda. The responding party takes up the question asked by requesting party about Why the property was sold off in tier 3 cities, and if it was due to a cash crunch. Question of alienation answered by requesting party. Further, the requesting party claimed that they expected allegiance from the respondents. Saw a clear deviation from the responding party’s end.  Also, their reputation in the market is misrepresented.  Clear channels of communication are encouraged by the requesting party, where they Want small ventures to remain intact. Further, they would want a public statement of enhancement/improvement of the relationship. 

11:39 AM The responding party further discusses the best course of action, on how they’re a small business and how the other party helped with their resources in expediting their growth. Moreover, they ask if the requesting party is willing to renegotiate the lease deal.  Parties further agree to public clarification and are Ready for joint notification about the mediation process.  The requesting party is Ready to offer debt at 18 per cent interest as compounding interest. Notification of healthy relationship to be set out by the requesting party.

11:42 AM The respondents want the requesting party to hear the entire offer which can be taken forward in the next session.  Hence,  the 1st agenda is cleared. The responding party clarifies that they are not aiming at taking up any more debt and make a proposal of an offer of giving 10 per cent for 3 crores. Further, they express their desire of going international as they are doing well in tier 1 and tier  2 cities with door-to-door delivery and  That is why the question asked about supply chains was asked in the beginning. Further, the respondents want to renegotiate the current deal. The mediators are then thanked for the parties having a fruitful discussion. 

11:47 AM Concluding statements made by the requesting party. 

11:48 AM  Closing statements by both the mediators are given. Solutions recapitulated by Mediator 2 i.e Firstly, a public clarification ( to be explanatory in nature) on how the other party has helped. Secondly, a Review of offers tabulated (regarding finances) and finally the potential and commitment to rebuilding trust are appreciated. With this, they also appreciate the breakthrough of clearing the air in the most amicable manner. 

11: 52 AM Judges join another room for discussion while participants wait. Results announcement- The Coffee Culture team was heavily in sync with the client and counsel.  Their team Seemed very natural when it came to cross-checking, and agendas were well drafted. Teams played a very active role, although time management could be an area for improvement.  Certain flaws were pointed out by Mr Mohd Humdhan. Feedback remarks were given by Miss. Ekta Bahl where told the participants that Language in mediation should be softer, and reframing and summarising could have been done more effectively by mediators. Parties could have used the mediators more effectively. 

11:58 AM Mediator  232 and The responding party i.e TC 219 were declared as winners. Closing remarks by the host were given. Question asked by the winning team on how mediators can be used effectively. Addressed by Ms Ekta Bahl and Mr Mohd. Humdhan. TC 219 also asked about career prospects in mediation which was answered by Ms Prachi Mehta by giving her background history. Ms. Ekta Bahl also gave an account of her mediation journey.  Mr Mohd Humdhan appreciated the idea of looking at different perfectives as a mediator also. Session Concluded.

 DAY 3 | FINALS

 

02:05 PM Greetings to the judges. The session started with a welcoming note by Ms. Prachi Thakur, Co-convener, ADR Society, who also expressed gratitude to the judges Mr. Amit Sanduja, Mr. William Patrick McPhilamy, Ms. Anupama Ahluwalia, Mr. Jaydeep Mehta, and Ms. Radhika Arora.

02:10 PM A brief of the concept of mediation was given by the mediators. The process was defined as collaborative, where parties come together to solve problems that have arisen between them, and they do so with the mutual assistance of the mediators. They based mediation on four pillars: party autonomy and the option of self-decision, party centralism, confidentiality, and voluntary neutrality.

02:15 PM The Ground rules for the session were set by the Mediators. They gave analogies so as to depict the role of mediation and mediators in resolving disputes.  It was explained that the mediators are not judges, and anything that the parties say cannot be used for or against them at any point in time. They also explained the lack of information exchange as a root cause of disputes, and hence promoted the parties to divulge more information.

02:20 PM The requesting party explained the situation of their company and thanked the other party for their acceptance of a mediation session. They also explained their reasons to negotiate, mainly not harming their existing relationship and clarifying any existing bad air between the two parties.

02:30 PM The counsel for requesting party appreciated the analogies used by the mediators in explaining to them the concept of mediation, and expressed their gratitude to the other party for opting for mediation and not the conventional litigation which would have made the parties antagonistic and cost them a lot of money, which was supposed to be used for the good of the people.

02:35 PM The Client for the responding party explained the grounds for their disputes and envisioned the alignment of agendas of both parties. They explained they had no hurtful intentions whatsoever behind their actions and the dispute arose because of differences and not poor intentions. They hoped for the session to result in something substantial and for the parties to be in a better position by clearing out the foul air.

02:45 PM The Counsel for the responding party expressed their hopes of taking away something fruitful from the session. They believed mediation to be laidback and opted for proceeding cautiously and not jumping or rushing into a decision which can make situations very confusing. They also commended the analogies used which set a very positive tone for the entire mediation.

02:52 PM It was agreed that an apologetic attitude on behalf of the responding party would help in a better resolution. Thereby, similarity in agendas set up by the parties would result in reaching an amicable solution.

02:54 PM The counsel for the responding party suggested setting the grounds and expectations after clearing any foul air between the parties, which would require restructuring agendas and expectations.

03:00 PM The requesting party justified their actions as being made under the careful supervision of their risk assessment team and not merely a personal decision taken in heat of the moment or rashly, but due to the urgency of the situation and paucity of time taken immediately.

03:12 PM The mediators suggested that allegations should not be made which would result in the spreading of rumours, and the agenda set with respect to the mending of the situation, the responding party demanded clarification to be issued in public so that the market forces recognize it wasn’t a hostile takeover and the share price is not affected anymore.

03:19 PM The requesting party clarified that the decision alleged to be a hasty decision was not taken without supervision, and was in fact taken with the assistance of experts, but was taken promptly as an immediate and fast decision was necessary to be taken by the team.

03:22 PM While the responding party agreed that the requesting party was performing to the best of their ability, business results matter more than the intention itself, which was not given by them. Summarize. The mediators proposed that in the best interests of the parties, the teams should move to the structuring part and if in future that does not seem plausible, then a caucus should be called.

03:25 PM Caucus was called by the responding party who demanded compensation for the losses arising out of the breach of contract, and also stated that they believed a deadlock was reached as the interests of both the parties were going in opposite directions. It was also stated by the party that the requesting party was not setting out clear interests and expectations which made it difficult for them to negotiate.

03:37 PM Caucus was then called by the requesting party who expressed their anger over the fact that the responding party did not turn up in the mediation session or in the funeral.  They also expressed their desire to dilute their shares in the opposite company and vice versa as well. They further demanded compensation for the breach of their contract.

03:44 PM The mediators and the parties concluded the session on the note that both parties were open to collaborating with each other professionally with regard to the subsidiary issue and the publishment of a joint statement. They were further ready to propose their offers again in another session if deem fit by both parties.

03:55 PM The Honourable judges appreciated the participating teams for their performance in the final rounds and highlighted the grey areas where more precision could have been useful. They further wished the students the best of luck in their future endeavours and the organizing committee for their efficient conduction of the entire competition.

 

 

Call For PapersLaw School News

   

ABOUT THE JOURNAL

The HPNLU Journal of Law, Business and Economics is an annual double-blind peer-reviewed journal of the Centre for Law Business and Economics, Himachal Pradesh National Law University Shimla. The Journal aims to be a forum that engages and promotes scholarly research works amongst academicians, researchers and students interested in areas like business law, trade law including international trade law, economic development, international trade, taxation, investment and securities laws etc.

CATEGORIES FOR SUBMISSION

The contribution may be made in the form of articles, Notes & Comments and Book reviews. The contribution, in any category, should be a comprehensive and in-depth analysis of contemporary issues in business, economics and its interplay with law. The Journal would encourage contributions in the field of Business & Corporate Laws; Trade Law including International Trade; Banking & Insurance Law; Insolvency & Bankruptcy Law; Taxation Laws including International Taxation; Competition Law; Consumer Law and other emerging areas of corporate laws. The following word limits should be observed: ARTICLES (≥6000 to <10000 words) ESSAYS & COMMENTS (≥4000 to <6000 words) Book Review (≥3000 to < 4000 words) (Contribution under this Category is required to be made along with the new hard copy of the Book.) \

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

1. Submissions shall be accepted only in the English language.

2. All contributions are required to be accompanied with an ‘abstract’ of 250- 300 words. The abstract must expressly include the novelty and usefulness of the idea that the author wishes to put forth and must categorically mention the specific contribution of the article beyond the existing available literature.

3. Co-authorship is allowed up to one (01) co-author only.

4. The manuscript should not contain any references to the identity of the authors.

5. The body of the manuscript should be in Times New Roman, Font Size 12 and 1.5-line spacing. The footnotes should be in Times New Roman, Font Size 10 and single line spacing.

6. For Citation, refer the HPNLU-Shimla Citation Style only. Please click the link https://hpnlu.ac.in/PDF/252e010c6417-45fc-a15d-75fded9c3905.pdf.

7. Manuscripts should only use footnotes as a means of citation. No other method shall be permitted.

8. Lengthy Quotations are discouraged. Author(s) should avoid long quotations and keep it at minimum wherever necessary with full and proper acknowledgement.

9. Lengthy and multi-paragraphed footnotes are discouraged. The citations must mention the page(s) of the source and in cases where Court Judgments are referred to, the footnote should also mention the paragraph of the judgment in addition to the page number of the Reporter.

10. Only authoritative websites may be cited. References to internet sources such as Wikipedia, blogs, commercial websites, etc., are not acceptable.

11. Send your manuscript in MS Word (.docx) format to clbe@hpnlu.ac.in. The subject of the email should be “Submission to HPNLU-JLBE ”. The submissions must be sent by 11:59 pm, October 30, 2022.

COVERING LETTER

1. The author(s) is required to send a covering letter mentioning the title of the paper, name, designation and details of the author(s) and institutional affiliation. Further, the author(s) are required to make a solemn declaration about the originality of the manuscript and that the same has not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere.

2. Paraphrasing another author’s work shall not be considered as original work. The source must be acknowledged.

CONTACT PERSON & ADDRESS

Dr. Arun Klair, (Member Editorial Board): +91-9417273800 Centre for Law, Business and Economics, Himachal Pradesh National Law University, Shimla 16 Miles, Shimla-Mandi National Law Highway, Ghandal, Dist. Shimla 171014

Law School NewsMoot Court Announcements

Himachal Pradesh National Law University, Shimla is organizing the THIRD EDITION OF its NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2022 (28th-30th October, 2022).

The Competition

3rd Himachal Pradesh National Moot Court Competition in association with National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).

[28th-30th October, 2022]

About the Institute

The University is committed to providing interdisciplinary and practical/application-based legal education, keeping in view the requirements of the overall development of its students. Under the academic and administrative leadership of the Hon’ble Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Nishtha Jaswal, the team HPNLU is committed to achieving new heights in legal education. The university started functioning on the 5th day of October 2016. In the five years and a half of its foundation, HPNLU, Shimla has seen tremendous growth and has undertaken a good number of innovative measures to enhance the academic potential of its faculty members, students, and research scholars.

About the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India was established on 12 October 1993. The statute under which it was established is the Protection of Human Rights Act (PHRA), 1993, amended by the Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act, 2006. It is in conformity with the Paris Principles, adopted at the first international workshop on national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights held in Paris in October 1991, and endorsed by the General Assembly of the United Nations by its Regulations 48/134 of 20 December 1993. The NHRC is an embodiment of India’s concern for the promotion and protection of human rights. Section 2(1)(d) of the PHRA defines Human Rights as the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India.

About the Competition

Himachal Pradesh National Law University, Shimla, (HPNLU, Shimla) is delighted to announce the third edition of the National Moot Court Competition, 2022 in association with the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). The competition is powered by SCC Online and EBC as knowledge partners. This flagship event has been devised with the aim to create an opportunity for learning the development of jurisprudence on emerging trends in constitutional law and human rights law, besides armoring the upcoming generations of the legal fraternity with research and oratory skills. The Moot Proposition of the Competition will revolve around constitutional law, human rights, and related laws. However, the participants will be expected to explore different dimensions of law and not restrict themselves to the theme of the Competition. In the past, HPNLU has successfully conducted two editions of its National Moot Court Competition in virtual mode, which witnessed significant participation of law students from all over India. Keeping up with the spirit of mooting, this year as well, we are delighted to organize our flagship event in association with NHRC, in the premises of our campus, surrounded by the beautiful landscape of Shimla. We cordially invite your Law School/ University/ Institution/ College etc. to participate in the Competition.

Format

The Competition will be conducted offline, and the venue for the same would be Himachal Pradesh National Law University, Shimla. This edition’s problem will revolve around contemporary and developing aspects of Constitutional Law and Human Rights Law.

Registration

Round I registration shall start on the 13th of September, 2022, and the last date for round I registration is the 30th of September, 2022. A detailed timeline is provided in the brochure. The Moot Court Committee at HPNLU, Shimla welcomes Law Schools, Colleges, Institutions, and Universities from all over the country, to participate in the 3rd HPNLU National Moot Court Competition in association with NHRC, 2022. All interested may show their interest by registering for the competition by filling in the Google Form, as provided hereunder and in the Rulebook as well.

Registration Link for Round I

Contact us

We’ll be happy to address any queries and provide assistance in the process. All Queries may be directed at mcc@hpnlu.ac.in or you can contact the following person for any clarifications.

Mr. Shubham Mahajan (Student Co-convenor)

+91 9877226812

Mr. Sanchit Sharma (Student Member)

+91 8091720227

Ms. Vanshika Maan (Student Member)

+91 7428051693

For more details: BROCHURE 3rd HPNLU NMCC 2022

Law School NewsOthers

Established in 2016, Himachal Pradesh National Law University (HPNLU) is striving toward newer heights daily and is set to scale new benchmarks in the years to come. The university has come up with the MBA course in Corporate Law.

Online applications are invited for 30 seats in MBA (Corporate Law) for the Batch 2022-2024.

The criteria for admission for the Batch 2022-2024 will be on a merit basis. The eligibility criterion is Graduation (or equivalent) degree in any discipline from a recognized University established by Law with at least 55% marks (50% marks in the case of SC/ST candidates). Shortlisted candidates will be invited for Group Discussion (GD) followed by a Personal Interview (PI)

Application Fees is INR 2000 (Non-Refundable). The candidates may apply online mode from (02-09-2022 to 15-09-2022) at www.hpnlu.ac.in. or erphpnlu.ac.in

For any queries related to admission: Please Contact HPNLU Admission Committee during Timings (10:00 AM to 4:00 PM)

Contact Details:

Dr Esha Sharma +91-8894862537

Dr Deepika Gautam +91 – 9816958674

Dr Praveen Kumar +91- 7831018877

Call For PapersLaw School News

ABOUT HPNLU, SHIMLA: 

The Himachal Pradesh National Law University, Shimla was established by an Act of the Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly in the year 2016 (Act 16 of 2016). In the four years of its foundation, HPNLU, Shimla has seen tremendous growth and has undertaken a good number of innovative measures to enhance the academic potential of its faculty members, students, and research scholars. Led by the visionary scholar of law, the Vice-Chancellor Professor (Dr.) Nishtha Jaswal, the University has been very proactive despite the spread of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing lockdown, HPNLU, Shimla has been at the forefront of using digital platforms to raise awareness about issues as far spread as Fundamental Duties, Reproductive Rights of Women, Human Rights and Access to Justice, etc.

 

ABOUT THE CENTRE FOR ADR AND PROFESSIONAL SKILLS: 

The Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolutions and Professional Skills aims to promote research in the field of dispute resolution mechanisms in India. To find out the further concerns for research in ADR, it is necessary to analyze the existing structure and reasons for not being able to cater to the needs of emerging diversified disputes among persons and institutions. The Adjudicatory mechanism and win-loss conclusions, reached by traditional dispute resolution bodies, on several occasions, results in further intensifying the disagreements rather than resolving them forever. It is one of the biggest achievements that all forms of ADR, i.e., Arbitration, Mediation, and Conciliation, do not leave the party aggrieved but satisfied. It is like a win-win situation for both parties. ADR successfully bridges the gap left by traditional adjudicatory institutions.

 

ABOUT THE NEWSLETTER: 

To carry forward the objectives of the Centre, the Centre decided to start a quarterly e-Newsletter whose primary aim is to catalyze the awareness about alternative dispute resolution and to foster ADR culture with the participation of students in research avenues. The e-newsletter will also disseminate knowledge relating to current affairs and legal news in the field of ADR. The e-Newsletter will have 5 sections and intends to include articles and case comments from students, experts, academicians, and reputed legal professionals practising in the field of ADR.

Click here to access the previous Issues.

 

THEME

  1. The Article/Essay should be written around the themes:
  •        Role Of Indian Courts In ADR OR
  • Need Of Mediation Laws In India 

The author can write on either of the themes or on any related sub-themes.

  1. The case comment should deal with a relevant and recent judgment (after 2020) concerning Alternate Dispute Resolution, at both national as well as international levels and must, provide the author’s take on the issue, explaining the legal background succinctly and clearly.

 

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

All the submissions must follow these guidelines: –

  • Articles/Essays: 2000 – 3000 Words. Articles should be confined to the topic above mentioned.
  • Case Comment: 1500 – 2500 Words.
  • The word limit is inclusive of footnotes and is flexible at the discretion of the Editorial Board.
  • Co-authorship is allowed up to a maximum of 2 authors only.
  • The main submission must not contain the credentials of the author(s) or the name of their institution. A separate cover letter containing the specifications of the author(s) must be attached to the e-mail. The Article must be submitted in the .doc/.docx file only.
  • The submissions must be original works and should not have been published elsewhere.
  • All submissions are subject to a plagiarism check if the work is found to be plagiarized the submission will be rejected. Minimum plagiarism allowed 15%.

 

FORMATTING AND CITATION STYLE

The submission should be free from all grammatical & spelling errors.

The content of the submission must be in the Times New Roman font with the font size 12, line spacing 1.5, and the text should be justified.

The Bluebook Uniform System of Citation (20th edition) shall be strictly adhered to. The footnotes shall be in Times New Roman font, the font size 10, and line spacing of 1.0.

 

MODE OF SUBMISSIONS

All submissions must be made in the electronic form to *GOOGLE LINK*  with the name of the file being “Title of the Article/Essay/Case-Comment” latest by 15th October 2021 (11:59 PM). Upon the selections, author(s) will be notified by e-mail and the CERTIFICATE OF PUBLICATION for the same will be provided to all the selected author(s) after the publication of the newsletter.

 

For more details, refer Call For Papers – 15th October 2021

 

CONTACT INFORMATION

For any queries or clarifications, write to us at “cadr[at]hpnlu.ac.in” or contact:

Law School NewsOthers

Professor Nishtha Jaswal has been appointed as the first woman Vice-Chancellor of Himachal Pradesh National Law University, Shimla.  Chief Justice of HP High court and Chancellor of HP National Law University appointed Dr. Nishtha Jaswal as VC for a tenure of five years. In a first of its kind, Dr. Nishtha Jaswal and Prof. Paramjit S. Jaswal, VC RGNUL, become the first couple to be Vice-Chancellors of two NLUs at the same time. A gold medalist and academician, Dr. Nishtha Jaswal has a teaching experience of 32 years and research experience of 34 years. She specializes in constitutional Law, Administrative Law, Human Rights and Environmental Law. She has over sixty five research papers and six books to her name. Her book titled Environmental Law has been cited thrice by the Supreme Court of India in the landmark judgement reported as In Re: Noise Pollution (V), 2005 5 SCC 733.

Prof. Nishtha Jaswal has been designated as Mehr Chand Mahajan Professor of Law by Panjab University, Chandigarh. She has served Panjab University, Chandigarh in various capacities. She remained the Chairperson, Department of Laws, Panjab University, Chandigarh. Dr. Nishtha Jaswal has a wide range of administrative experience. She has served as member of Chandigarh Commission for Protection of Child Rights; Punjab Legal Service, Authority U.T. Chandigarh; Advisory committee of Institute of correctional Administration, Chandigarh; State Level Authorization committee of Punjab under the Transplantation of Human Organs Act- 1994 and Advisory Committee, Nari Niketan, Chandigarh.

She is also a member of Board of Studies and Academic Council CUP Bathinda, RGNUL Punjab, UILS PU Chd, IMS University Dehradun, HPU Shimla and KU Kurukshetra.

Dr. Nishtha Jaswal was also awarded British Academy Visiting Professorship in 1992.