MPL 3 Quicklinks:

• MPL 3 Homepage
• MPL 3 season standings
• Information on 53 moots
• MPL 3 rulebook

[[NLIU Bhopal]] bettered [[NUJS Kolkata]] in the final rounds of the second edition of the [[SLCU National Moot Court Competition|School of Law, Christ University Moot (SLCU Moot)]], a recently added Tier 5 moot in the Mooting Premier League.

Apart from finishing runner-up, [[NUJS Kolkata]] took home both the best speaker award won by Ishaan Sharma and the best memorandum award, thus earning 15 MPL points and starting their campaign this mooting season. NUJS finished second in last year’s MPL.

[[HNLU Raipur]] and [[ULC Bangalore]] finished semi-finalists in the moot.

The moot was organised by [[Christ Law College Bangalore|School of Law, Christ University, Bangalore]] and saw participation from 31 law schools from across the country. The moot problem was based on constitutional law and contemporary issues related to corruption, bribery and the Jan Lokpal Bill.

Last year’s MPL number 3 NLSIU Bangalore did not participate in the moot but last year’s winner Nalsar Hyderabad failed to make it into the knock-out rounds [full list of participating colleges available on Legallypedia]

The NLIU team consisted of speakers Bishen Jeswant and Rijoy Bhaumik along with researcher Sanapika.

Bhaumik said that he appreciated the excellent hospitality, good organisation and high level of competition. “Especially in the semi-finals, HNLU was excellent. We thought we would actually lose that round. The judging was overall very pleasing. In the quarters, we were taken to our limits and it was a good experience.”

{source}<div style=“float:right;”><div id=“fb-root”></div> <script>(function(d){ var js, id = ‘facebook-jssdk’; if (d.getElementById(id)) {return;} js = d.createElement(‘script’); js.id = id; js.async = true; js.src = “//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1”; d.getElementsByTagName(‘head’)[0].appendChild(js); }(document));</script> <div class=“fb-like-box” data-href=“http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mooting-Premier-League/244851672218219” data-width=“292” data-show-faces=“true” data-stream=“true” data-header=“true”></div></div>{/source}Moot organisers Prashanth Shivadass and Adoksh Shastry said that they were very happy with the huge turnout which exceeded their expectations. “All the teams were satisfied with the accommodation and the judging. The final rounds were judged by Madras high court senior advocate Arvind Datar, Hon’ble Justice V. C. Daga from the Bombay high court and senior advocate R.G. Raghavan from the Karnataka High Court. Hon’ble Justice Mukundakam Sharma from the supreme court and Karnataka home minister R. Ashoka attended the valedictory ceremony.”

But Bhaumik noted that the only drawback of the moot was the cumulative scoring system which increased the luck factor in qualifying from the preliminary rounds. “In our first round, we were stuck in a low scoring court room, whereas in the second round, we were in a high scoring court room. Cumulative scoring means your progress in the moot depends wholly on your scores. Instead most other moots first follow the win/loss method and then apply the cumulative scoring system.”

Shastry responded that transparency was a main objective throughout the proceedings and each team was provided a booklet including all speaker and team scores. “In order to cut out disparities in judging to a great extent the SLCU Moot Court Competition 2011 adopted a cumulative scoring system in the prelims and the quarter finals. This was thus a 50-50 scoring of oral scores and memorial scores.”

“Disparities amongst court rooms in the preliminary rounds are bound to exist as no two judges can tabulate in a similar manner,” admitted Shastry. “But in view of this also a system was implemented where the judges were given a reference scoring sheet to adhere to.” He noted that the “luck factor” was reduced by their system because oral rounds were only one part of a moot court and research and drafting were also important. “The [non-cumulative] win/loss tactic might work out in some instances but it leaves out integral parts of the moot experience… The best team must have an overall package and hence till the quarter [finals] cumulative was maintained.”

All memorials were judged by only one judge who also drafted the problem, to minimise subjectivity, said Shastry. “An arc system of scoring was adopted in memorial judging by the problem drafter wherein memorials marked high were rechecked at the end of each day so as to ensure that on all the days of scoring memorials the best were compared and contrasted to avoid human mood swings and tendencies and fatigue,” he added.

[[Mooting Premier League 3 season standings]]

• The Maritime Moot which took place in early July this year is being considered with retrospective effect. Effectively, this is the first Moot of Season 3 MPL.

For more information please refer to the [[MPL 3 rulebook]].

MPL 3 Moot Court Competitions version 3.04

The changes proposed in version 3.03 will be frozen for this season of the MPL, unless there are very convincing and new reasons.

BCI v. DMH: Many readers suggested that the BCI Moot is quite prestigious and should be elevated along with DM Harish. The second tier is the “world class” tier, which requires significant international participation. After discussions and feedback we are minded to not elevate the BCI moot this season. BCI is hugely popular among law schools but this does not diminish the reality that there is little if any foreign participation, despite it officially having attempted to make its moot international last season. On the other hand, DM Harish saw up to foreign participation of up to 14 teams last season.

Further, some readers commented that a moot’s promotion/demotion should not only be based on the moot’s performance during the previous year. We definitely agree with that and pedigree and consistency is important. Over the years BCI has not attracted any international participation at all. If the moot attracts significant foreign participation this season, the door is wide open next season for BCI’s promotion to Tier 2.

MPL organiser points frozen: After positive feedback the MPL 3 will acknowledge the efforts and potential points sacrificed by moot organising law schools that do not participate in their own moot. MPL points will automatically go to organising colleges equal to half the points awarded to semi-finalist teams in that moot, with figures rounded down. The host law school for the SLCU Moot, Christ University, will therefore be awarded one point.