"HA"
sometimes i wonder how much one syllable can convey...need i say more! GO NALSAR!!!

u r obv. overjoyed #1, on ur alma mater being #1. Many congrats.

U nedn't say more ... but how about some whoops and a wild war-dance expressing your joy ... then u can post the link containing the video here ... i'll buy drinks for my NALSAR frnz wen we watch that and share your joy :D

[No offense. Just my bad taste of humour]

Kian... Looks like you people haven't yet been able to get in touch with the Nalsar convenor to confirm that it was NLU Jodhpur that won the best memo for BR Sawhney...

Ok. So that's 4 moots that NLS has won which are not included in the rankings now?

Reply please Mr. Kian.

4 !?!? what are u talking about

Second B. Krishna Memorial National Intellectual Property Rights Moot Court (someone pointed it out earlier also) (won by NLU last year .. nliu or nalsar runners up)
ERNAKULAM GLC MOOT (organized by surana& surana i think)
1st anti-trust moot court competition .. reported by legallyindia itself
African Human Rights Moot Court Competition, organized by University of pretoria (recognized by ILSA - organizers of Jessup) (international moot competition!)

one international (!) and three national competitions (all with good participation) ..... i am interested ..... why are these not included kian sir?

Dear All

in the last two weeks, there have been many comments regarding inclusion of various moots. Comment 4 states that we have not included 4 moots which NLS has won.
Regarding NLU Jodhpur competition law moot, we decided against the inclusion of it since this is the first edition ad wanted to analyse the moot first before including it in our table. This moot is under consideration for inclusion in season 2 of MPL.
Regarding GLC Ernakulam moot which again NLS had won, we had also considered that moot for inclusion in tier 4. However after consulting various people, we decided against the inclusion of the moot.
Some NLS students pointed out that NLS had won a moot in Pune. We are extremely sorry, but in MPL we have a specified number of moots only and at this moment we cannot include all moots.
Since everything in MPL has been transparent, let me again clarify the methodology used for inclusion of moots. We consider the following things in a moot before including it in MPL :
1) Reputation among the law students.
2) Participation of teams. (it is not necessary that wherever NLS will participate, we will include that moot. It might also happen that a moot which has no NLS particpation might be included.)
3) Quality of judging
4)moot problem.
5) Hospitality

Based on these criteria and after extensive consultation with Moot Court committee s of different colleges, we have prepared a table. We do not say that the table is 100% accurate, but it gives a fair reflection of the performance of every law college in that academic year.

We are currently evaluation and preparing the table for next season. All those who think that some moot should be in a higher tier, you are more than welcome to send us your opinion.

We would like to add that our list might not be entirely correct and that some deserving moot might have missed being in the borderline. But the 36 odd moots which we are covering can be said to be a good reflection of the mooting scenario in India and also can be said to be the top moots for this season.

There were few comments regarding scoring criteria for tier 1 competitions. We would give it a thought and try to see what can be done. however at the same time, we do not want a team who has won Jessups to win MPL by not performing well in other moots.

i am from nlu jodhpur: just clarfiying. and how is the moot we just conducted not fit all the criteria?

and what about the 'African Human Rights Moot Court Competition, organized by University of pretoria (recognized by ILSA - organizers of Jessup) (international moot competition!)' you forgot to explain its exclusion. i did not know about this ... indian teams are doing good. this is nlu's year for jessups!!!

the pune moot also fits in all the criteria that you have written above .. certainly if mliu tankha and sp sathe do then. 'we cant include all moots' is not a reason.

if would also like to inform you that glc ernakulum which we won last year is a very good moot. older that most of the other moots you consider. and it fits all criteria you wrote about.

1. you give criteria
2. moots we are talking about EASILY fit that criteria (especially since the teams that have participated in those moots are the same as the ones in moots you have considered)
3.. your response 'we cant include all moots' -
4. then what is the point of the criteria? hahaha ...

if moots fit criteria -- should be included. i am not one to have sympathy for any college but if it is true that they won FOUR moots --- and all are not counted --- then what is the point

To clarify further we had stated that based on these criterias we had decided the moots. However we cannot include all the moots. We had to decide on a specified number of moots and could not cover all moots. So we finally concluded on some 36 odd moots for this season. There might be that some moots could have been included. But we had to take the hard decision not to since we had to limit the number. We decided the list after consulting various people in whose opinion the list was an accurate depiction of the top 36 odd moots.
So based on these criteria, we had to decide on some moots and leave out few who narrowly missed the margin for this season. Also we allot the moots to different tiers based upon these criterias.Some moots have to be left out.

However the list of the moots was there from the start of the season and whenever we made any changes, proper reasoning was provided.

The 4 moots in question was never a part of MPL from the very start. We had considered these moots even before the rounds were conducted and NLS had won it. There is no question of biasness and everything was transparent from the very beginning.

It is just not possible to include all the moots conducted in the Country and abroad. We just hope that you understand that the list has been prepared in a transparent manner after extensive consultation.

At the end of the day it s just fun. Almost all the law colleges have contributed to MPL in some way or the other. We invite every reader to help us for preparing the table for next season. We also would request the MCCs of each college to give their opinion on changes required for next season.

Thank you everyone for your comments about MPL. This is our first season and we guarantee that each and every comment of every reader will be given due weightage. Also be sure about the transparency of a particular moot. If a moot has been not included, we will make a decision about it much before the rounds are conducted.

Best Wishes

Vinay Mishra

why should every moot to which NLS goes to should be included? By just saying that a particular moot "fits the criteria" doesn't mean it actually does. The legallyindia team must have done some research and analysis for including and not including a particular moot. By simply saying that some 4 odd moots to which NLS went fits into the criteria is the absurdest vaguest and most desperate thing I have ever heard!

Jus cuz a moot is older than the other is no reason why it should be included!
The criteria as I understand it is
1) Reputation among the law students.
2) Participation of teams. (it is not necessary that wherever NLS will participate, we will include that moot. It might also happen that a moot which has no NLS particpation might be included.)
3) Quality of judging
4)moot problem.
5) Hospitality

Now whosoever debating there says that a given moot does fit in and wans to challenge the MPL system should come up with a detailed compilation with how on earth does their moot fit into this critera. Simply saying it does is like fooling around!! and trying to shy away from reality.

And obviously all the moots CANNOT be included. Only because the ones which were left out are the ones where NLS goes doesnt make them more special does it?
If NLS is not on the top..learn to accpet it instead of disputing the entire system.

n btw MPL is definitely the closest reflection of the mooting standards of law schools in the country.

There is a problem with including the World Human Rights Moot in Pretoria into MPL. They choose 2 teams from each 'region' based on the heads of argument. And then these two teams compete with each other in the so called finals. So from the 5 regions there are 10 finalists and 5 'winners'. The other 5 'finalists' become runners up. That is exactly what happened with NLS and GNLU. The tag of 'winner' and 'runner up' in this situation becomes extremely deceptive because the only other team u were up against in the moot was the one from your own region. U won against only one team and the team tht lost becomes the runner up. The format of this moot is incompatible with the MPL scoring system. Your main achievement in this moot is to be able to get to the 'final' by submitting an impressive draft which is not really the main thing in 'mooting'.

so friends learn to accept that if you are not on the top..its cuz may b some one else deserved it more..blaming the system raises questions on your inaptitude to accept defeat gracefully. GROW UP and stop being such losers!!

@ Kian: Being a part of the moot court committee and a free lancer I know it takes a great deal to come up with an exhaustive research criteria and then analyse every aspect of it. I appreciate that u stand by your criteria. considering MPL's popularity and the fact that it breaks most popular myths in the indian law school circles (read: NLS is the best syndrome) it is surely bound to attract controversy! however i appreciate MPL for still maintaining its trasparency and fairness. hats of to u :-)

Thumbs up for ur effort !! keep it up!

If there is one moot the MPL people should consider including in their list, it is the ICC Trial Moot held at Hague. Every year 2 teams are selected to represent India at the Hague based on a written assignment. These Indian teams compete with other teams selected from their respective countries. US teams qualify for this Moot through the prestigious Pace Criminal Law Moot. The judges who come for the ICC Trial moot include the sitting judges of the ICTY and other tribunals at the Hague.

NLS, Nalsar and NLU have regularly represented India at this moot. Nalsar were also runners up in the first edition of this moot in 2008.

i dont think anyone is talking of being bias ... but i dont get the logic. a college won an international moot court competition and gets no recognition as opposed to a college that wins the amity law school moot court competition or iiclam or the first time a corporate law moot court competition was organized by a college in delhi? (when the reason you say for not including the jodhpur moot was because its the first time --- clearly you are being inconsistent)

no bias ... but once such moots are brought to your attention --- whats stopping you from including them if you are so interested in improving the standard of the rankings ... either provide a reason for not including these moots based on your criteria and the quality of the moot ... or include them! i dont see how the 3-4 moots brought to your attention are any different than the moots you have included ... in fact i know personally that 2 of them were of a high standard as regards both the teams (all national law schools, amity, glc, ils participated) and the judging ... i realize you cant add all the moots conducted in the world ... but if it is brought to your attention that moots of high standard have been conducted--- then why not add them??

Thank you vinay for your clarifications. I am glad that despite the undue pressure from a specific law school that is destabalised cuz of its defeat in MPL..MPL has still upheld its fairness ans transparency in all aspects without giving in to the fake and motivated controversy deliberately created regarding the authnticity of the entire system.

u rock mann :-) long live MPL

you are being transparent. but you are not telling us why moots, which clearly satisfy criteria, are not included while others are ...

It is just bad luck that those 4 moots that NLS won cannot be included

1. World Human Rights moot- not included because it was the first edition and they just won one round against GNLU. There were five winners from 5 continents. Do they deserve any 'winner' points after beating only one team?

2. GLC Ernakulam- It is not possible to include every tiny little moot held in any corner of the country in this list. GLC Ernakulam is just not good enough to find its place in the list.

3. Krishna Menon Moot- Plain bad luck that this moot is not included. This moot deserves to be a tier 4 moot especially since a moot like the ULC Bangalore Moot is a part of this list. Either the tier 4 should also be made really exclusive, or it should be expanded to include other mediocre moots too. Including a few mediocre moots over the others in tier 4 can really hurt.

4. NLU Anti trust- Well they say it was the first year and hence they decided to see how it goes before including it for the next year. Irritating that it might seem especially when your college has won the moot, it is still a valid argument to not include a moot in its first edition.

@ 16 Hey as far as I recollect then MPL had already made public the list of competitions it was to cover earlier this year then it interests me to know that how come u realised that good moots are being excluded from the league table only once NLS won them!!
shunt u have taken a stand earlier in order to raise ur "unbiased" opinion abt the inclusion of these moots as "only according to u" these moots "fit the criteria"..As MPL says that they have conducted wide consultations with MCCs of different law schools..then why cant u accept that perhaps others dun concure with your view of including them!
Dun u think its pompous on ur part to assume that certain moots should be included in MPL only n only cuz u abstractly and without ne logical argument or proof "feel" that "they fit the criteria" though all other law schools may not rate them as highly..
cmon have u forgotten its a democracy..u cant impose ur one sided views on the entire law fraternity!!
i supose u dun understand dat!

well the situation with Tier 4 is really tricky. There is always a scope to say this moot is of the same standard as the moot included in the list. We do understand that for Tier 4 there is always a margin of error.

For this, it would be good if you all comment on your opinion regarding inclusion of a Tier 5. We can bring some of the moots from Tier 4 to Tier 5 and include some other moots also. However, this can be implemented in the next season only. Do let me know whether including more moots would be a good idea and not dilute the competition.

Also a table of this sorry cannot be 100% correct and there is always a margin of error. This is the first season and our experience with your comments will help us in having a fool proof table for the next season.

Do let me know your thoughts on the same.

--

Vinay Mishra

Thanks for all your comments and apologies about the delay in my response.

Vinay's explains things well above at #21 and #11.

At the end of the day, we had to draw the line somewhere, although a valid case can always be made for inclusion of 'just one more' moot.

We had a long period where we have invited submissions for further moots for inclusion and have continually cross checked with moot court convenors and committees about their views.

Unless a highly compelling argument was made for inclusion, in that there has been a gross oversight or miscategorisation, we are not able to add moots incrementally to the MPL ad infinitum, as we hope you understand.

For obvious reasons, at this stage we can also not add a new moot AFTER a moot has been held and the winner has been declared, as any such decision would inevitably favour one college over another.

I agree, the MPL criteria are not perfect and there are bound to be borderline cases that just make it or don't, one way or another (such as ULC Bangalore's moot, this season).

There are also very valid arguments for inclusion of a tier 5. A reason that we have not, has been a function of bandwidth as another commenter has mentioned previously, but we do hope to cover even more moots in the next season.

We also plan to have a longer and open consultation period with the top moot court commitees before next season to establish the final list of moots in light of everyone's experience this year.

If you do have any suggestions, please post below or contact us directly and we can have a chat and discuss individual cases, in light of the above.

Best regards,
Kian

ps: @3 - we are still following up on BR Sawhney best memo results, please bear with us. Sometimes it does take a long time to get through to the authoritative person, in light of their work commitments etc.

national moot court competition - first time it was organized - included in rankings by legally india.
how does the argument by mr. vinay that the moot organized by nlu was not included because it was in its first year explain this? :-) interesting ...

and nls QUALIFIED for the international rounds in pretoria - they didnt just go there and win one round ... get your facts right before. and more than 50 teams were there in the qualifying round ...

alllso ... there may be borderline cases ... but i think people are making the point that these moots were clearly not the borderline cases ... but clearly made the criteria ... if you want true rankings ... why not consider these moots? still dont have a reason ...

#20 - nothing about 'feeling' that they 'fit the criteria'. an international moot recognized by ILSA with more participation that most of the moot currently being considered does fit the criteria ... not just anyone's feeling. and so do the other 3 moots --- even glc ernakulum ... they all had participation from all major law schools ... they all had good judges and problems. if you think that they dont fit the criteria and it it just someone's 'feeling' --- then argue against that view on merit --- explain how they dont meet criteria --- 'plain bad luck' isnt an explanation

no one is being biased ... mpl is transparent ... obviously ... being lawyers youd agree that discourse is not bad. questions are being asked ... noone is saying anyone is biased. but it would be good if people answered these questions with logic and merely say that there is transparency and there is no bias ...

Thanks again. In response to the above, the exclusion of certain moots is a function of covering only X number of top moots.

This selection is based on talking to Moot Court Committees about which moots they considered to be the most prestigious and popular.

Somewhere they and we had to draw the line. In this case this number was 36 (35 originally) and we could not have realistically covered 70 moots in this first season.

Importantly several other moots could have been suggested and were accepted during the long and open consultation periods but please understand that it will be almost impossible for us to include any moot that already has a winner.

There is practically no way to include moots that have already taken place without being prejudicial to one school over another.

Following the principles of natural justice, the only way the MPL can be fair to everyone involved is if it does not act retroactively at such a late stage in the competition and the points are allocated according to pre-agreed criteria.

Furthermore, anonymous comments are well and good in polling opinion but very hard to use in making an objective decision.

If you want to make a serious case for inclusion of an upcoming competition please contact me directly - +91 900 405 6651 so we can evaluate your petition objectively.

Finally, there are still enough points and competitions coming up that should still give most of the top colleges a fair shot at winning this season.

Best regards,
Kian

It's astonishing - and rather sad - that people are actually taking MPL as the benchmark for how good a university's mooters are. Grow up, folks.

Guys - it's easy to find fault. There are only two things that you can find fault with in a person - everything that he/she does and everything that he/she does not do.

Despite all its shortcomings and criticisms (some of which may be justified, and even if not justified is extremely well articulated), the MPL is indeed unique and unprecedented in the annals of Indian mooting history. It has brought awareness and focus about local, regional, national and international moot courts like nothing ever before.

The MPL has also generated tremendous interest and passion in the mooting scene. I can now foresee every law school/college worth its salt pay extra attention to its mooting activities from the coming academic year onwards. Almost every moot court committee will most likely schedule its calender around the "recognized" MPL moots. As a fall out - perhaps, the "unrecognized moots" are going to suffer in terms of lack of serious participation. All the more reason why the MPL should recognize the "deserving" moots. Easier said than done - but knowing Kian, I know he will not let any stone unturned in this regard.

It may be too early and even presumptuous right now, but the MPL should move towards a stage where organizers apply to MPL for recognition, and such recognition should symbolize a certain minimum standard for the competition. This way - if the competition is not recognized by MPL, then the blame could shift on the organizers, rather than on Kian and team. Early days for this, perhaps.

All said and done, kudos to Kian and the Legally India team for conceptualizing and implementing the MPL league. What perhaps started as "fun" is likely to transform the mooting scene in India, and more importantly, generate mooting interest among the tier 3,4 and 5 law schools and colleges in the country. Way to go - Kian and Vinay!!

i think everyone has made their point ...

please stop now ... all that's come out is mpl needs to have answers when people ask why moots are not included. for example, you have still not explained how one moot (which was conducted for the first time) was included whereas another moot was not included (for the reason that it was being conducted for the first time)

just be a little more careful ...

just wait and watch after few years its gonna be JINDAL PREMIER League


jindal is a next gen colg in making....................................................

First compete with Kalburgi law college, Belgaum, Babu Jagjivan Ram College of Law, Talegaon, and Maharaj Shivaji Das Education Society Law Institute in West Bengal. You may win against them.

nalsar recently won the justa causa nagpur moot court competition but they never cribbed that their moot was not counted in the mpl, they won every award there, best team, best memo, best speaker,,,,see, it shud be the discretion of kian nd vinay to include a moot or not.....nls guys buck up...there is still much to win.....by making allegations on the scoring system u guys are not living upto ur name!! BUCK UP!

I believe NALSAR was also runner-up at the Anti-Trust Moot at Jodhpur.

Why hasnt been the 1st NLU Antitrust Moot Court Competition, 2010 organized by NLU Jodhpur been included in the list....
its a very gud moot and also it has one of the leading law firms Lakhsmi Kumaran and Sridharan sponsoring it and in collaboration with Competition Commission of India and also has Lexis Nexis as Knowledge partner

i believe NALSAR won justa causa for the 5th time in a row and they were even won something in the antitrust moot
both these moots aren't in the ranking but they dont seem to be wanting..

stop cribbing nls... maintain some grace.. nalsar seems to display much poise

this is turning into some 5th grade cat fight ..... no one is cribbing. people are talking. talk back .... or stop spending your life on this forum.

NALSAR won the Justa Causa Moot Court Competition 2010. It was the 4th time in a row for NALSAR, while the moot was being conducted for the 8th time. We don't particularly care if it's included or not, but I'd wish that LI considers it. There were 32 teams, mainly from Maharashtra and South India.
Also, NALSAR was adjudged the winning team, and won nothing else. Best Speaker went to LC-II, DU and there was no best memorial.

Kian and Vinay: As per the National Academy of Legal Studies and Research University Act, 1998 - its NALSAR. Not Nalsar.

lol

It was renamed Nalsar University of Law in 2005. It's no longer NALSAR.

Honestly a college like NLS is never going to win the MPL, it isn't built to win such ranking showdowns. It doesn't send the strongest teams to every moot like some other colleges, it sends rookie juniors. They lose, they learn. They go on to win bigger things later on.
It is really up to you to figure out whether winning the big stuff is more important or just winning a lot of small things.
I understand why this would be such an emotional matter for some. It isn't for most though.
PS I am seriously starting to wonder if the people who post about Jindal are actually from Jindal. [...]

@ 42:

Precisely. The GLC and KLA teams comprised entirely of second years and - more importantly - first time mooters, who did a very commendable job. Watch them go onto greater things in the years to come. In fact, the two researchers of the Jessup team this year cut their teeth on national moots such as GLC and Henry Dunant.

I don't really understand the breezy nonchalance of #42 and #43. Mooting in Nalsar and NUJS is as democratic an exercise as it is in NLS. In fact, all of Nalsar's mooting achievements that have added up to that figure on the table are by first-time mooters (mostly from second year), except Jessup and Surana Corp Law. These debutantes cut their teeth pretty deep. And we hope they will go on to do great things in the future. While I don't consider the MPL to be the definitive word on a college's mooting worth, I do think we need to be alert to this kind of insidious snobbery predicated on an assumption of irrefutable primacy.

If they send second year first timers to moots like DM Harish n Henry Dunant where do the other pro mooters go? Jessup, Stetson, Vis and Man Lachs would not require more than 20 mooters and researchers between them. Or do you mean NLS has hardly has good mooters outside the second year?

NLS sends rookies for sure. Like a 4th Year at K.K. Luthra. Quite the optimum time to cut your teeth.

NALSAR sent second year students to nearly all the moots above.
all 3 members of the team that won herbert smith were second years.
the team that came runners up in henry dunant were also all second years

i know it for a fact too. half of NALSAR's mooting team is 2nd years...

even NUJS won William C. Vis in its third year only............c'mon NLS guys dun cum up wid illogical arguments 4 ur poor show......

seriously. ALL of you need to get a life and leave mpl to what it is. jeez ....

ILS has won ULC Bangalore..so please update the table accordingly.

22 out of the 30 members of NALSAR's moot team are second years

I'm now convinced how juvenile these kids from NLUs are. What are you going to compare next? Which bench the mooters sit on in class? Next, one kid is going to say "You know what - the NLS moot court team members at the GLC moot are really cool - one of them sits in the fourth row, and the other sits in the sixth row." Then someone from Nalsar is going to say "Ha - so what? The Nalsar team at Henry Dunant - one of them sits way back - in the seventh row - and the other- he hardly attends classes. Even if he does - he always is a backbencher. "

Then someone else - to lend solidarity to his Nalsar friend will add - "What about the rest at NLS? They are all mug-pots, sitting under the teacher's nose in the front row"

And the battle will rage on . . . Grow up, kids.

ILS has won SURANA AND SURANA INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2010 and also got the best speaker award.

Haha... I can just imagine NLS's great mooters reading this and laughing. Their achievements speak for themselves. If you want a benchmark of mooting quality, then there's only one moot that counts: Jessup, where every single University worth its salt sends its very best, the cream of the cream. And just look at the NLS performance at Jessup the last three years: 2007: Octos; 2008: Semis; 2009: Quarters, 7th best memo, 8th best speaker, top ranked break team in the prelims. Let an Indian university come even close to replicating that, then we'll talk.

so NLS has decided that it will rest only in its past glory............ c'mon people do well in sum other muts also....

England play cricket for ashes only.......................

there world cup is ashes so that makes England the best team??????

why is it that when NALSAR wins any moot, the table is updated promptly but here ILS has won two Tier-4 moots but the Legally India Team refuses to acknowledge it for the past 2-3 days

#58, thanks for your comment but I would just like to say unequivocally that this is not true. We like ILS and all other law schools equally! :-)

But because we try to get final confirmation of results from convenors in each case (which includes categories such as best researcher, memorial or orator, which often no one seems to remember with 100% accuracy), it takes some time. Convenors are often hard to get hold of for some of the moots.

Plus, it was Holi yesterday!

However, the story on the ILS wins should be up later today. Thanks for your patience.

Best regards,
Kian

dude people do NOT want to know about rigged moots
ulc keeps sending its dan to judge the moot and he ensures that no national law school team makes it anywhere past the semis. its SURPRISING that NO national law school team has EVER won the moot.
and he makes his contempt more than obvious for all national law schools by saying that national law schools have failed at mooting and are only producing corporate lawyers.
we accept that national law schools produce more corporates than people who join the bar but frankly mr.dean, you haven't done much for the same either, and as regards mooting, all national law schools have shown in the table above that they have a high mooting standard by having won all the non-rigged moots.

oh and i was talking about ULC

NALSAR has won best non US speaker, octa finalists twice and 3rd best memorial as opposed to the nls 8th.

@62- to add on they came third in the world finals in 2006 or 2007 I think, they lost to the eventual winners in the semis.

@55- well nalsar hasn't done so bad ya, right. chill. and of course with all due respect not denying NLS' great mooting record.

@ Kian

Your explanation is well accepted.

Thanks for updating the rankings

In response to #60, please see the following from the Moot Court convenor of ULC Anirudh Garga: "All score cards are to be put in our website - www.ulcxivmoot.in - soon to ensure transparency. I like to say that this moot is one of the most transparent moots all over India, we do not have any personal choices and all judges were eminent persons in the field of law."

To say that NLS only sends rookies to competitions such as KLA is nonsensical, and anyway the moot was won by 2nd year students from NLU. (HA HA!)

So much for the 'we only aim for Jessop's'!

Moreover, in any democratic institution, which I would presume NLS is, (Given the fact that they boast a very active student community), the selection of moots is based upon merit in the Intra-University competitions.

Thus, it would only be logical that the team which represented NLS was the one which was allocated KLA, keeping in mind their merit in the intras and in such a process if a 2nd year team is selected, then NLS-ites cannot crib that they lost due to lack of experience.

This of course, does not mean that NLS is in any way not elite, or that its a third rung law school. It only means that it couldn't win competitions (this year) and anyone who has mooted would tell you that there are many other factors (read: luck) which contribute to a win. Perhaps this was not their year. The same can be said about NUJS which is, without a doubt, an elite institution.

It might interest some that NLU students have been "allowed" to compete in only 25 moots this year. Thus, there are many moots, including many in the MPL, that NLU-ites simply cannot participate.

As someone said above: 'C'est la vie' (Such is life!)

Get used to it.