If you used Clearing in 2024, how did you find it?

Referred Assessed Moot 27th August

Hiya is anybody being referred to do the moot, i was just wondering if someone could give me a few tips because I’m going into this clueless. I understand i have to make a plan before joining the call, but as the appellant do i just join and wait for her to ask me questions, and what should my plan consist of any help would be great.

Reply 1

Stiffy Byng

A moot is supposed to simulate an appellate hearing. In real life, the advocate's role on an appeal is mainly to answer the questions of the Court, but you should prepare submissions before the moot.

Try to have no more than five points. Star advocates such as Lord Pannick KC rarely have more than three points. Start by telling the Court the outline of your submissions: "My Lords, I have three points. They are 1..." (etc). Then do the first point.

When asked a question listen carefully and answer as clearly as you can. Do not speak over the Judge.

When moving on, say "That was my first point. I turn to my second point...".

If referring to a case, cite at most the headnote (if the Court wishes), and the key passages you rely on. Deal with any authorities that are against you and explain why the case can be distinguished or was wrongly decided (assuming that the simulated court you are in is the top court).

After you finish, listen carefully to your opponent's submissions. When replying, focus only on the most important points, and be brief.

Watch online videos of the Supreme Court, especially cases featuring Sir James Eady KC, Dinah Rose KC, and Lord Pannick KC, to get an idea of how it's done. There are also some videos online of Pushpinder Saini KC (now Mr Justice Saini) in the ECtHR. Push is another masterful advocate.

Have fun, good luck!

(edited 1 month ago)

Reply 2

Fxxxxxxx

Original post by Stiffy Byng

A moot is supposed to simulate an appellate hearing. In real life, the advocate's role on an appeal is mainly to answer the questions of the Court, but you should prepare submissions before the moot.
Try to have no more than five points. Star advocates such as Lord Pannick KC rarely have more than three points. Start by telling the Court the outline of your submissions: "My Lords, I have three points. They are 1..." (etc). Then do the first point.
When asked a question listen carefully and answer as clearly as you can. Do not speak over the Judge.
When moving on, say "That was my first point. I turn to my second point...".
If referring to a case, cite at most the headnote (if the Court wishes), and the key passages you rely on. Deal with any authorities that are against you and explain why the case can be distinguished or was wrongly decided (assuming that the simulated court you are in is the top court).
After you finish, listen carefully to your opponent's submissions. When replying, focus only on the most important points, and be brief.
Watch online videos of the Supreme Court, especially cases featuring Sir James Eady KC, Dinah Rose KC, and Lord Pannick KC, to get an idea of how it's done. There are also some videos online of Pushpinder Saini KC (now Mr Justice Saini) in the ECT HR, another masterful advocate.
Have fun, good luck!

I’ve completed the moot but i like setup my script on the laptop and had my phone on it so while i was on call with the judge i was reading from it but in the end she said she had no questions so should i be worried 😭

Reply 3

Stiffy Byng

Original post by Fxxxxxxx

I know neither the issue you were arguing nor the person playing the role of the Judge, so I can't answer your question. Perhaps your arguments were so compelling that the person in the role of the Judge had nothing to say.

A law school might organise a moot in order to test whether students have understood some aspect of course content. Or a law school might organise a moot in order to simulate courtroom advocacy.

I have seen law tutors who may have no courtroom experience conduct a moot by allowing students to read scripts and asking no questions. That might satisfy the requirements of the exercise from an academic point of view. But it's not an accurate simulation of what would happen in an appellate court.

In a real court, it is better to speak from bullet point notes than from a script. Oral advocacy is supposed to be a live and organic process. In all contexts, whether politics, the law, business, stand up comedy, or whatever, a speaker who uses few or no notes is more engaging than a speaker who reads a script.