Attention!

Dear Finalists,


You may download the following files from the provided links...






Answers to problem clarification


http://www.mediafire.com/?a0a0db23sa3dk9w



-------


Moot Memorial's Format


http://www.mediafire.com/?s3nn5xq0312la4t


--------------------------------------------------------


Regards,
Thank you.

MOOT QUESTION – GRAND FINAL

MOOT QUESTION – MMU GRAND FINAL

Buat Duit Sdn Bhd, a cybercafe on Jalan Ayer Keroh Lama, decided to renovate an old building that they had just acquired which is adjacent to their existing building. They contracted with Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd for renovation work to be done at the price of RM200,000. As the result of work done on the newly-acquired building by Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd, part of the existing building was damaged: cracks appeared and paintwork was seriously spoilt; the cost of repair being adjudged at RM25,000.

Towards the completion of the renovation work, a van belonging to Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd carrying noxious paint was left unattended and unlocked in front of the building site. Ms Ichiwa Tamokasi, a passer-by, was curious about the source of the smell and went to investigate. As soon as she opened the container holding the paint, a strong fume overcame her which caused her to become unconscious. Ms Tamokasi subsequently went into a coma which lasted for three months, and until today she has not yet fully recovered from the incident. Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd had to pay RM30,000 for the cost of medical bills for Ms Tamokasi.

When Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd submitted their final bill, it showed a total of RM215,000. The additional amount of RM15,000 represented the cost of replacing leaking water and gas pipes throughout the building. When challenged, Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd referred to Clause 3 of their standard terms, which the managing director of Buat Duit Sdn Bhd had signed and returned midway through the contractual period, as he had many other matters to attend to and simply forgotten signing this said document.

Clause 3 reads:

Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd is entitled to levy additional charges for extra work which is required before renovation works can begin.

Furthermore, Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd denied liability for the damage to the current office building, pointing to Clause 15:

Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd will not be liable for any loss or damage arising out of the work carried out within the terms of this contract.

They also refused to pay for the injury to Ms Tamokasi, pointing out to Clause 31 which states:

Buat Duit Sdn Bhd shall indemnify Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd in respect of any loss or damage caused to any person present at the site when renovation work is in progress.

Buat Duit Sdn Bhd issued a cheque for RM175,000 to Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd and pointed out they needed to spend RM25,000 for repairing the damage brought about by the renovation works.

In the Sessions Court, Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd claimed against Buat Duit Sdn Bhd for (1) RM25,000 which they considered to be outstanding from the contracted amount; (2) RM15,000 for replacing the leaking gas and water pipes; and (3) enforcement of indemnity by Buat Duit Sdn Bhd for the medical expenses incurred by Ms Ichiwa Tamokasi. Buat Duit Sdn Bhd argued that all three clauses should be construed against Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd as, on this occasion, Buat Duit Sdn Bhd had been acting in the capacity of a consumer.

Sessions Court Judge Abe Lincoln held that:

(1) Buat Duit Sdn Bhd is liable to pay Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd for the RM25,000 as Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd were fully protected by Clause 15. This is because Clause 15 had been incorporated into the contract by virtue of the contract being signed by the managing director of Buat Duit Sdn Bhd. Clause 15 was not ambiguous as it was properly constructed and it satisfied the reasonableness test.

(2) Buat Duit Sdn Bhd is liable for the RM15,000 as Clause 3 was properly incorporated in the contract. It need not matter if the contract was signed at the completion of the pipe replacement work. Even though Clause 3 is of an extremely broad scope, the Court is of the opinion that it satisfies the reasonable test. As such, Clause 3 can be enforced against Buat Duit Sdn Bhd.

(3) The indemnity in Clause 31 for medical expenses was effective as it had been properly incorporated and constructed, and it was not unusually onerous.

On appeal to the High Court, the decision of the Sessions Court Judge on all three findings was affirmed.

Buat Duit Sdn Bhd now appeals to the Court of Appeal after having been granted leave to do so.

SOALAN MUT – PUSINGAN AKHIR

SOALAN MUT – PUSINGAN AKHIR

Buat Duit Sdn Bhd, sebuah kafe siber yang terletak di Jalan Ayer Keroh Lama, telah membuat keputusan untuk mengubahsuai sebuah bangunan lama yang baru diperolehi oleh mereka, yang terletak di sebelah bangunan mereka yang sedia ada. Mereka telah memasuki kontrak dengan Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd berjumlah RM200,000 untuk kerja pengubahsuaian tersebut. Akibat kerja pengubahsuaian yang dijalankan oleh Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd di bangunan yang baru diperolehi tersebut, sebahagian daripada bangunan sedia ada telah mengalami kerosakan. Keretakan telah wujud di bangunan sedia ada, kerja mengecat telah terjejas secara serius dan kos membaik pulihnya adalah berjumlah RM25,000.

Selanjutnya, di penghujung penyempurnaan kerja pengubahsuaian, sebuah van milikan Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd yang membawa cat merbahaya telah ditinggalkan tanpa pengawasan dan tidak berkunci di hadapan tapak kerja. Cik Ichiwa Tamokasi, seorang yang berlalu di tapak kerja tersebut, berasa ingin tahu tentang punca bau dan beliau telah membuat penyiasatan. Sebaik sahaja beliau membuka bekas yang mengandungi cat tersebut, wasap yang kuat telah melemaskan beliau dan menyebabkan beliau menjadi tidak sedar. Seterusnya, Cik Tamokasi dalam keadaan koma yang berlarutan selama tiga bulan dan beliau masih belum pulih secara sepenuhnya sehingga hari ini. Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd terpaksa membelanjakan wang sebanyak RM30,000 untuk membayar bil –bil perubatan Cik Tamokasi.

Apabila Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd mengemukakan bil terakhir, harga yang dicatitkan pada bil tersebut adalah RM215,000. Jumlah tambahan sebanyak RM15,000 itu adalah untuk kos penggantian paip-paip air dan gas untuk seluruh bangunan. Apabila perkara ini dipertikaikan, Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd merujuk kepada Klausa 3 terma standard mereka, yang mana pengarah pengurusan Buat Duit Sdn Bhd telah menandatangani dan mengembalikannya di pertengahan tempoh kontrak, atas sebab beliau perlu mengurus banyak perkara lain dan telah lupa untuk menandatangani dokumen tersebut.

Klausa 3 memperuntukkan bahawa:

“Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd adalah berhak untuk mengenakan caj tambahan untuk kerja tambahan yang diperlukan sebelum kerja pengubahsuaian boleh dimulakan”.

Di samping itu, Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd menafikan liabiliti untuk kerosakan pada bangunan sedia ada dengan merujuk kepada Klausa 15:

“Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd tidak akan bertanggungjawab atas sebarang kerugian atau kerosakan yang berbangkit daripada kerja yang dijalankan mengikut terma-terma kontrak”

Mereka juga enggan membayar untuk kecederaan Cik Tamokasi dengan merujuk kepada Klausa 31, yang menyatakan bahawa:

“Buat Duit Sdn Bhd akan menanggung rugi Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd terhadap apa-apa kerugian atau kerosakan yang dialami oleh sesiapa yang berada di tapak kerja apabila kerja pengubahsuaian dijalankan”.

Buat Duit Sdn Bhd telah mengeluarkan satu cek yang bernilai RM175,000 kepada Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd dan mereka menegaskan bahawa mereka terpaksa membelanjakan RM25,000 untuk membaik pulih kerosakan yang disebabkan oleh kerja pengubahsuaian.

Dalam Mahkamah Sesyen, Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd telah menuntut terhadap Buat Duit Sdn Bhd untuk (1) jumlah sebanyak RM25,000 yang mereka anggap sebagai baki yang belum dijelaskan daripada jumlah kontrak; (2) jumlah sebanyak RM15,000 sebagai kos untuk mengganti paip-paip gas dan air; (3) penguatkuasaan tanggung rugi oleh Buat Duit Sdn Bhd untuk perbelanjaan perubatan ke atas Cik Ichiwa Tamokasi. Buat Duit Sdn Bhd mempertikaikan bahawa ketiga-tiga klausa patut ditafsirkan sebagai tidak menyebelahi Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd kerana dalam keadaan ini, Buat Duit Sdn Bhd telah bertindak dalam kapasiti seorang pengguna.

Hakim Mahkamah Sesyen Tuan Abe Lincoln memutuskan bahawa:

(1) Buit Duit Sdn Bhd adalah bertanggungan untuk membayar Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd jumlah sebanyak RM25,000 kerana Mana Boleh Sdn Bhd adalah dilindungi sepenuhnya oleh Klausa 15. Ini disebabkan Klausa 15 telah dimasukkan ke dalam kontrak apabila kontrak itu ditandatangani oleh pengarah pengurusan Buat Duit Sdn Bhd. Klausa 15 adalah tidak kabur dan ia memenuhi ujian kemunasabahan.

(2) Buat Duit Sdn Bhd adalah bertanggungan ke atas jumlah RM15,000 kerana Klausa 3 telah dimasukkan dengan sempurna ke dalam kontrak. Adalah tidak penting untuk menimbangkan sama ada kontrak tersebut hanya ditandatangani setelah kerja penggantian paip telah disempurnakan. Meskipun Klausa 3 mempunyai skop yang terlalu luas, mahkamah berpendapat bahawa ia memenuhi ujian kemunasabahan. Justeru itu, Klausa 3 boleh dikuatkuasakan terhadap Buat Duit Sdn Bhd.

(3) Tanggungan rugi untuk perbelanjaan perubatan bawah Klausa 31 adalah efektif kerana ia telah dimasukkan dan digubal dengan sempurna dan tidak terlalu membebankan.

Apabila rayuan ke Mahkamah Tinggi dibuat, keputusan Mahkamah Sesyen tentang ketiga-tiga pendapat tersebut telah dikekalkan.

Buat Duit Sdn Bhd kini membuat rayuan ke Mahkamah Rayuan setelah mendapat kebenaran untuk berbuat demikian.

Preliminary Rounds Rankings

Below are the Top 10 rankings for Preliminary Rounds of MMU Law Moot Competition 2010/11.

ENGLISH

1. Team 17

2. Team 43

3. Team 63

4. Team 45

5. Team 38

6. Team 58

7. Team 5

8. Team 62

9. Team 26

10. Team 6

BM

1. Team 10

2. Team 35

3. Team 8

4. Team 23

5. Team 66

6. Team 20

7. Team 31

8. Team 28

9. Team 71

10. Team 64

Finalist of Law Moot 2010/2011 Preliminaries

Dear students, kindly take note that these following teams are the top 4 rankings for Preliminary Rounds.

English - Team 43 and Team 17

Bahasa Malaysia - Team 10 and Team 35

As such, these four teams are chosen to proceed as finalist in the upcoming Grand Final. Once again, congratulation!

The organising committee would also like to extend their utmost gratitude to all participants of the MMU Law Moot Competition 2010/2011.

Thank you.

Release of Court List ( Part 1)

Thursday English Court List (Please register yourself at CLCR 2002 at 7pm)



Moot 1 = Team 55 v 13

Moot 2 = Team 25 v 48

Moot 3 = Team 36 v 41

Moot 4 = Team 58 v 12

Moot 5 = Team 32 v 29

Moot 6 = Team 44 v 33

Moot 7 = Team 50 v 38

Moot 15 = Team 46 v 19

Moot 9 = Team 45 v 17

Moot 10 = Team 68 v 27

Moot 14 = Team 56 v 34

Moot 17 = Team 26 v 15

Friday Bahasa Malaysia Court List (Please register yourself at CLCR 2002 at 7pm)

Moot 1 = Team 40 v 49

Moot 2 = Team 1 v 64

Moot 3 = Team 30 v 14

Moot 4 = Team 8 v 28

Moot 5 = Team 4 v 42

Moot 6 = Team 21 v 23

Moot 7 = Team 69 v 65

Moot 8 = Team 22 v 59

Moot 9 = Team 61 v 18

Moot 10 = Team 10 v 53

Moot 16 = Team 3 v 39

Moot 17 = Team 24 v 7

Release of Court List ( Part 2)

Saturday Morning English Court List (Please register yourself at CLCR 2002 at 8am)

Moot 11 = Team 6 v 51

Moot 12 = Team 60 v 9

Moot 13 = Team 5 v 62

Moot 8 = Team 37 v 43

Moot 16 = Team 47 v 63

Moot 18 = Team 76 v 73

Moot 19 = Team 75 v 70

Saturday Afternoon Bahasa Malaysia Court List (Please register yourself at CLCR 2002 at 1pm)

Moot 11 = Team 67 v 66

Moot 12 = Team 57 v 52

Moot 13 = Team 11 v 2

Moot 14 = Team 20 v 16

Moot 15 = Team 35 v 54

Moot 18 = Team 31 v 72

Moot 19 = Team 71 v 74

Announcement

Kindly be reminded that all respective teams must include both English and Bahasa Malaysia problem clarifications in their memorials. Full version of problem clarifications can be downloaded from the given link.

http://www.mediafire.com/?4ljydmmnec9psyq


Teams which will be mooting in English may rely on Bahasa Malaysia problem clarifications as well, and vice versa. However, if an English team who wished to rely on the facts from Bahasa problem clarifications, then they must translate the problem clarification from Bahasa into the language they will be mooting in.

* Please be noted that you are only required to translate that specific question of problem clarification that you are relying on.

* If you are an English team who wished to rely on a certain question from Bahasa problem clarification, then you are only required to translate that particular question. You need not to translate everything comes from Bahasa problem clarification; and vice versa.

Thank you

Attention to all Mooters!

THE PROBLEM CLARIFICATION can be downloaded from the following link.

http://www.mediafire.com/?4ljydmmnec9psyq

* kindly print an attached copy of the problem clarification and insert them into your memorial; place it after the moot question

ATTENTION MOOTERS!

ATTENTION TO ALL MOOTERS, PLEASE TAKE NOTE THAT THERE ARE CHANGES IN…

(i) THE PROBLEM CLARIFICATION,

* kindly print an attached copy of the problem clarification and insert them into your memorial; place it after the moot question

* this file will be uploaded to the blog by 23^rd October, 6pm.

(ii) MOOT QUESTION IN BAHASA MALAYSIA, AND

· Bahasa Malaysia moot question can be downloaded from the following link:

http://www.mediafire.com/?uvaapqtzw6t1b3m

· English moot question can be downloaded from the following link… (without any changes being made)

http://www.mediafire.com/?1tq5g7moxt6kui7

(iii) TIMELINE

THE TIME AND DATE FOR SUBMISSION OF MEMORIALS WILL BE EXTENDED FROM 25^TH OCTOBER (MONDAY) TO THE 26^TH OCTOBER (TUESDAY 10AM-5PM)

26^th October 2010 - Submission of Memorials (10am-5pm)

- (Venue MPBR 0016, room where the statute books were distributed)

28^th October 2010 - Exchange of Memorials (12pm-6pm)

11th - 13th November 2010 - Preliminary Rounds

24th November 2010 - Release of Preliminary Rounds Result and Publication of Final Timeline

KINDLY CONTACT Mr. Ler BEFORE THE SUBMISSION OF MEMORIALS. Thank you

Announcement

Dear participants,

Kindly be informed that the Schedule 1 (memorial's structure/format) can be downloaded from the following link:

http://www.mediafire.com/?x7o9g72m1r67fv1

Thank you.

Official Timeline for MMU Law Moot 2010/11

Official Timeline

Trimester 2 2010/11

12th October 2010 - Submit request for problem clarification to official email (mmulawmoot2011@hotmail.com)

14th October 2010 - Publication of Problem Clarification

25th October 2010 - Submission of Memorials

27th October 2010 - Exchange of Memorials

11th - 13th November 2010 - Preliminary Rounds

24th November 2010 - Release of Preliminary Rounds Result and Publication of Final Timeline

MMU Law Moot Competition 2010/11 Rules and Regulation

The following are the rules and regulations of the Competition:

1. DEFINITION

1.1 Abbreviations

“MMU” refers to Multimedia University.

“MULS” refers to Multimedia University’s Law Society.

1.2 General Definition

“Administrator” means the person appointed to administer a Moot.

“Advanced Round” means the Final Round.

“Bailiff” means the person who maintains order during a Moot.

“Competition” means the Law Moot Competition organised and administered by MULS.

“Competition Director” means the director of the Competition who is a member of the MULS and who heads the Organising Committee.

“Competition Problem” means the official competition question for the Preliminary Rounds and the Advanced Rounds as supplemented or corrected by any official Problem Clarifications or corrections.

“Head Administrator” means the person in charge of the panel of Administrators.

“Memorial” means the written pleadings of each Team, written and submitted in pursuant to these Rules.

“Moot” means the round of mooting in the Competition.

“Official Timetable” means the official timetable of the Competition.

“Organising Committee” means the members of the MULS who are in charge of organising and managing the Competition.

“Preliminary Rounds” means the rounds of mooting to determine the four (2) highest ranking Teams in each Tournament that would progress to the Advanced Round.

“Problem Clarifications” means the official clarifications of the Competition Problem and of these Rules.

“Rules” means the Law Moot Competition Rules, subject to any supplementary rules.

“Team” means any team registered for the Competition.

“Tournament” means the English Tournament, the official language of which is the English language, and the Bahasa Malaysia Tournament, the official language of which is Bahasa Malaysia.

1.3 Interpretation

In these Rules unless the context otherwise requires,
(a) words and expressions in the singular include the plural, and words and expressions in the plural include the singular;
(b) words and expressions importing the masculine gender include feminine.


2. ORGANISATION OF THE COMPETITION

2.1 Organising Committee and Competition Director

2.1.1 The Organising Committee shall administer the Competition.

2.1.2 The Competition Director in consultation with the Head Administrator shall have the final say in all matters or disputes related to the conduct of the Competition.

2.1.3 Competition Director shall not:
(a) sit as a judge nor influence the judge(s) in any way;
(b) provide any assistance or instructions to any Team participating in the Competition;
(c) prejudice any participating Team in any way.

2.2 Administrator(s)

2.2.1 There shall be a panel of Administrators who are law academicians.

2.2.2 The Head Administrator will appoint an Administrator for a Moot and will designate the date and location for each Moot.

2.2.3 The Administrators must conduct a Moot consistent with these Rules and in consultation with the Head Administrator.

2.2.4 The Head Administrator shall serve as final arbiter of implementation and interpretation of these Rules.

2.2.5 Administrators shall not:
(a) serve as coach or in any other way assist a Team registered in his or her Moot;
(b) prejudice any participating Team in any way.


3. STRUCTURE OF THE COMPETITION

3.1 Competition Tournaments

3.1.1 Unless otherwise specified in the supplementary rules, the Competition consists of two (2) Tournaments:
(a) the English Tournament; and
(b) the Bahasa Malaysia Tournament.

3.1.2. Teams participating in each Tournament will be determined by a random draw after the close of registration in the Official Timetable.

3.1.3 Each Tournament consists of two (2) levels:
(a) the Preliminary Rounds; and
(b) the Advanced Round.

3.1.4 Preliminary Rounds are applicable if there are more than sixteen (16) participating Teams.

3.2 Preliminary Rounds

3.2.1 Unless otherwise specified in the supplementary rules, all Teams shall compete in the Preliminary Rounds.

3.2.2 The pairing of Teams in the Preliminary Rounds shall be determined by a random draw.

3.2.3 In the event that an odd number of Teams register for the Competition, the odd Team will moot ex parte in accordance with Rule 8.4.2.

3.2.4 The Administrators may modify the pairings to account for absent Teams or other contingencies. If Teams must be newly paired, they must be provided their new opponents’ Memorials as soon as reasonably possible, but in no event less than fifteen (15) minutes prior to the start of the newly paired round.

3.2.5 Two highest ranking Teams in each Tournament will progress to the Advanced Rounds.

3.3 Advanced Round

3.3.1 The Advanced Round is the Final Round.

3.3.2 Teams progressing to the Advanced Round will be announced after the conclusion of the Preliminary Rounds.

4. PARTICIPATION AND ELIGIBILITY

4.1 Team Eligibility

4.1.1 All MMU law students are eligible to participate in the Competition.

4.1.2 The number of Teams eligible to participate shall be determined by the Organising Committee.

4.2 Registration

4.2.1 Each Team must complete and submit a registration form to the Organising Committee by the registration deadline in the Official Timetable.

4.2.2 Each Team must remit the appropriate registration fee (if any) by the registration deadline in the Official Timetable. The amount of registration fee payable (if any) will be prescribed in the supplementary rules.

4.3 Team Composition and Number as Identification

4.3.1 Unless otherwise specified in the supplementary rules, a Team is composed of two (2) members, namely one (1) counsel and one (1) co-counsel.

4.3.2. Each Team will be assigned with a team number by the Organising Committee upon registration.


5. COMPETITION PROBLEM

5.1 Release of Competition Problem

5.1.1 The Competition Problem will be released on the date or dates in the Official Timetable.

5.2 Problem Clarifications

5.2.1 Teams may submit written requests for clarifications of the Competition Problem to the Head Administrator by the date in the Official Timetable.

5.2.2 Problem Clarifications will be limited to factual clarifications of the Competition Problem and no legal clarifications will be allowed.

5.2.3 The Head Administrator in with the panel of Administrators will publish Problem Clarifications on the date in the Official Timetable.

5.2.4 Each Team must ensure that it receives and adequately notes the Problem Clarifications in preparation for the Competition.


6. JUDGES

6.1 Eligibility of Persons to Judge

6.1.1 The Head Administrator shall determine the persons who are eligible to serve as judges in the Competition.

6.1.2 Judges should disqualify themselves from judging a Team if they have a personal or professional relationship with someone affiliated with that Team, and if that relationship might jeopardise their impartiality or create an appearance of impropriety. However, judges should not disqualify themselves from judging a round merely because they have an acquaintance with a Team member.

6.2 Number of Judges

6.2.1 The Preliminary Rounds are heard by one (1) judge.

6.2.2 The Advanced Round may be heard by one (1) judge or a panel of three (3) judges.

6.3 Commentary by Judges

Judges are encouraged to provide direct feedback to the Teams regarding the Teams’ performance at the completion of a Moot. In providing such feedback, judges are advised to give due regard to the time limitations and schedule of the Competition.


7. MEMORIALS

7.1 Submission of Memorials

7.1.1 Each Team must prepare and submit a Memorial.

7.1.2 Each Team must submit the hardcopy of the Memorial to the Head Administrator on the date and time specified in the Official Timetable. The duty to prepare the hardcopy of the Memorial is on each Team.

7.2 Language of Memorials

Teams must submit Memorials in the official language of the Tournament in which they are participating.

7.3 Structure of Memorials

Rules relating to formatting, content, citation and anonymity of memorials are set out in Schedule 1.


8. MOOT

8.1 Language

Teams must moot in the official language of the Tournament in which they are participating. Interpreters will not be available.


8.2 General Procedures

8.2.1 In a Moot, each Team is allowed forty five (45) minutes to moot, which is to be apportioned as follows:
(a) counsel – 20 minutes
(b) co-counsel – 20 minutes
(c) rebuttal and surrebuttal – 5 minutes

8.2.2 Any of the counsels in each Team is entitled to deliver a rebuttal or surrebuttal.

8.2.3 Nothing may be handed up to the judge(s).

8.3 Extension of Time

Judges may, at their discretion, permit time extensions if counsels are requested to elaborate their argument.

8.4 Ex Parte Procedure

8.4.1 In circumstances where after waiting five (10) minutes, a Team fails to appear for a scheduled Moot, the Administrator may allow the Moot to proceed ex parte.
8.4.2 In the ex parte proceeding, the attending Team shall present its oral submissions, which is scored by the judge(s) to the extent possible as if the absent Team had been present and arguing. In such a case, unless supported with justifiable reasons, the Team that fails to appear for the scheduled Moot forfeits all scores stipulated under Rule 9.1.1(a).

8.5 Communications during a Moot

Only communications listed below are permitted:

(a) A counsel may communicate with the judge(s), and the judge(s) may communicate with that counsel, during the counsel’s allotted time.
(b) Counsels are not permitted as to communicate orally with each other to avoid disruptions and distractions. All communication at the counsel table shall be in writing.
(c) Counsels shall not communicate either orally or in writing with spectators or the Bailiff.


8.6 Spectators

The Preliminary Rounds and Advanced Round are open to the general public. During a Moot, the presence of the Team’s coaches, advisors, or other spectators affiliated are permitted in the courtroom.

8.7 Prohibition from attending a Moot

8.7.1 Team members or persons directly affiliated with any Team shall not attend a Moot in which their Team is not competing. If there is any violation the Administrator must be informed immediately, without disturbing the Moot, or immediately after the Moot has ended.

8.7.2 The Head Administrator shall have the discretion to impose a penalty on teams that violate this rule.

8.8 Audio and Videotaping

8.8.1 No audio or videotaping of moots is permitted without the advance permission of the judge(s) and the Administrator. The use of any appliance, capable of storing audio and/or video is prohibited during the Competition.

8.8.2 Participating Teams are not permitted to view or listen to any such audio tape until after the completion of the Tournament in which the taped Moot occurs.

8.8.3 MULS reserves all rights to the audio and videotaping, or any other form of audio or visual reproduction, of any Moot or part thereof. All Teams participating in the Competition are deemed to have consented to taping and broadcasting of that Moot.

8.9 Computers and Laptops in Courtrooms

During a Moot, counsels shall not operate laptops, handheld or desktop computers or computing devices for any purpose.


9. SCORING SYSTEM

9.1 Method of Scoring

9.1.1 The scoring system consists of two parts, namely:
(a) Scoring of the Moot (70%);
(b) Scoring of the Memorial (30%).

9.1.2 A Team’s total competition score is the sum total of (a) and (b). For the break down of the scores, refer to Schedule 2 and 3.

9.1.3 Scores for the Memorials will be given by the Administrator(s), and such scores may not be revealed to the judge(s). Scores for the Moot will be given by the respective judge(s).

9.1.4 All decisions made in the scoring system are at the discretion of the Administrator(s) and/or judge(s) and shall not be disputed.

9.1.5 Administrators and judges must keep confidential from all Teams the exact score in each pairing, and each judge’s determination in the pairing.

9.2 Determination of Ranking in Preliminary Rounds

9.2.1 Teams shall be ranked by the highest sum total of Rule 9.1.1(a) and (b).

9.2.2 In the event of a tie, Teams having the higher score for the Moot shall be ranked higher.

9.2.3 In the event of a tie in respect of the Moot score, Teams having the higher score for the legal content of the Memorial shall be ranked higher.

9.2.4 In the event of a tie with respect to both the Moot and the Memorial, Teams progressing to the Advanced Round shall be decided by the panel of Administrators and the decision shall not be disputed.

9.3 Determination of Winners in Advanced Round

9.3.1 The winner of a Moot in the Advanced Round will be the Team having the highest sum total of Rule 9.1.1(a) and (b).

9.3.2 In the event of a tie, the Team having the higher score for the Moot shall be the winner.

9.3.3 In the event of a tie in respect of the Moot score, the Team having the higher score for the legal content of the Memorial shall be the winner.

9.3.4 In the event of a tie with respect to both the Moot and the Memorial, the winner shall be decided by the judge or panel of judges, whichever is applicable, and the decision shall not be disputed.


10. AWARDS

10.1 Winner of the Tournament

The winning Team in the Final of each Tournament will be the winners and will receive the Challenge Trophy.


10.2 Best Oralist

10.2.1 In each Moot, the counsel with the highest individual oral score in Rule 9.1.1(a) shall be deemed to be the Best Oralist.

10.2.2 In the event of a tie, the judge(s) shall have the discretion to determine the Best Oralist, and such decision shall not be disputed.

10.2.3 Only the Best Oralist in the Final will be eligible for the Best Oralist Trophy.

10.3 Best Memorial

10.3.1 In the Final, the Team with the highest score for the Memorial in Rule 9.1.1(b) will be entitled for the Best Memorial Trophy.

10.3.2 In the event of a tie, the Head Administrator in consultation with the panel of Administrators shall have the discretion to determine the Team eligible for such Trophy, and such decision shall not be disputed.


11. MISCELLANEOUS

11.1 Complaint Procedure

11.1.1 If a Team believes that a violation of the Rules has occurred during a Moot, the Team shall inform the Bailiff in writing within five (5) minutes of the conclusion of that Moot. Teams must approach the Administrator with complaints if there is no Bailiff.

11.1.2 The violation and the parties involved in the violation shall be clearly described in the written notification. Teams are not allowed to approach the judges directly with regards to any violation of the Rules.

11.1.3 Failure to follow any of the procedures stipulated in this paragraph shall result in a waiver of the Team’s complaint.

11.1.4 If one or more judges believe that a violation has occurred during a Moot, he shall inform the Bailiff orally or in writing within five (5) minutes of the completion of the Moot. When possible, the matter should be brought to the Bailiff outside the attention of the other judges.

11.2 Additional and Supplementary Rules

The Organising Committee may make rules in addition and/or supplementary to the Rules in respect of any matters incidental, ancillary or supplementary thereto or concerning the conduct and administration of the Competition.