[Live Updates] : 5th NLIU Justice R. K. Tankha Memorial International Arbitration Moot Court Competition
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
21 Feb 2020 9:32 AM GMT
NLIU BHOPAL
The NLIU Justice R.K. Tankha Memorial International Arbitration Moot 2020 Live Updates.
Live Updates
- 23 Feb 2020 5:43 AM GMT
Courtroom 2
Judges: Chinmayee Prasad, Varun Chopra and Prateek MishraClaimants: T2 ILS PuneRespondent: T37 NUALS, CochinRespondent speaker 1The speaker started by posing a challenge to the jurisdiction of the tribunal on the ground of absence of meeting of minds. He cited Article 8 of CISG to support his argument, and went on to cite the supporting facts. Ms. Prasad interrupted the speaker and asked a factual question. The speaker answered it and was asked to proceed with the second prong of the argument.The speaker then argued that even though the respondents signed the agreement, they didn't intend to be bound by the arbitration clause which can be severed from the rest of the agreement. Ms. Prasad asked the reason of this assertion to which the speaker cited a case. Mr. Mishra asked as to why didn't the respondents challenge the addendum in the first place. The speaker then came on to the third prong of argumentation to answer their questions. Mr. Chopra said that the words of the agreement show a clear intention to be bound by it in entirety. The speaker cited an exhibit from the facts and was asked to proceed further.Mr. Mishra came back to the consent part again and pointed out the arbitration clause, asking the speaker as to why shouldn't those words be construed as binding. The speaker said that the said clause was merely laying down a possible condition, not a binding one. Mr. Chopra asked a factual question to which the speaker gave a satisfactory question and was asked to proceed. Ms. Prasad stopped the speaker again and asked a three fold question, to which the speaker answered by citing facts. The judges bought the answer and were satisfied with it. The speaker then proceeded to argue the second issue. He cited the closest connection rule and cited IBC Section 14. Mr. Mishra pointed out that the argument does not hold good in practice. The speaker then presented the alternative argument that was bought by the judges. The speaker ended by concluding his issue. - 23 Feb 2020 5:34 AM GMT
COURTROOM- 1
Judges:
1)Gunjan Mishra
2)Apoorv Kurup
3)Sagnik Das
Claimants:
TC 8 - RMLNLU
Speakers:
1) Kaustubh Srivastava
2)Siddhant Ahuja
Researcher:
1)Devansh Rathi
2)Ravi Shankar Pandey
Respondents:
TC 16 - TNNLU
Speaker:
1) Setupathy Rathnakumar
2) Aishwarya. A.
Researchers:
1) Sri Lakshmi
2) Sashimyia
The semi-finals have now begun. Respondents are presenting their arguments first. A few crucial submissions made by the counsels are- there is no valid arbitration agreement between the parties, there is no consensus ad idem in the agreement, etc. - 23 Feb 2020 5:23 AM GMT
Welcome to the third and final day of the 5th NLIU Justice R. K. Tankha Memorial International Arbitration Moot Court Competition! The judges have proceeded to the courtrooms and the Semi-finals have officially begun. The following teams have advanced to the Semi-finals:
- RMLNLU, Lucknow
- ILS, Pune
- TNNLU, Tiruchirappalli
- NUALS, Kochi
- 22 Feb 2020 12:37 PM GMT
Court room 4
The second counsel for Respondents began with the issue relating to disclosure of third party funding. She relied on Rule 27 of the SIAC Rules for the same and made an argument regarding the costs on which she was flooded with questions by the judge which she tried her best to answer but the judges seemed underwhelmed. So, she naturally proceeded with further arguments and was also granted an extension of 30 seconds.
The Rebuttal and surrebuttal saw a lot of fiery case law citations from each side trying to build their case further! With this, the round comes to an end.
- 22 Feb 2020 12:20 PM GMT
Court room 1
The rebuttals begin with the claimants who have 5 points to make. The claimants provide a rebuttal to the respondent's point regarding the consultation of the Ministry. The 2 minutes are now up! The claimants are successful in conveying their 5 points. The respondents are questioned about the disclosure of the third party and they continue to provide rebuttal to the claimants arguments. This marks the end of the rounds.
- 22 Feb 2020 12:17 PM GMT
Court room 2
After an interesting round of arguments and prolonged grilling, it's time for the rebuttals. The Respondents allege that the Claimant has violated various principles of the contract, while the claimant asserts that they have maintained the essence of the contract.The claimants also refused to disclose the 3rd party funding. This marks the end of the Quarter final rounds. Results are much awaited!
- 22 Feb 2020 11:59 AM GMT
Courtroom 1
The second speaker from the claimant side argued about natural justice and how the rules of natural justice are paramount.
She also talked about how unconfirmed news reports are very common in the business world and that it should not be relied upon. The judges questioned her than about any article or evidence which states that the news report is not true.
The dispute resolution clause, which seems to be the central issue, continues to keep coming up in the arguments of the parties.
The respondents are now presenting their final arguments. However, this has caused no respite for them, for the judges are continuously barging them with questions.
- 22 Feb 2020 11:48 AM GMT
Court room 4
The counsel for Respondents proceeded with the arguments after a brief introduction. She began by citing a foreign case law for ousting the jurisdiction of the tribunal and submitted that national courts have the power to decide the case. The judges grilled the counsel in regards to the case and after some short answers, the judges did not seem convinced about the veracity of the ratio relied on.
The counsel proceeding with her next argument but was was stopped by all the judges together as they thought that she was making contradictory statements with respect to severability of contract and the counsel could not make herself clear which made the energy in the room very tense.
