UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES,

PANJAB UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH

PROJECT REPORT
of
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
on the topic of

MOOTING: ARGUEMENTIVE SKILLS

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

Prof. Gulshan Kumar Charu lata

B.Com LLB (3rd year)

Section D / sem. 6
 Roll no. 204/20

ACKNOWLWDGEMENT

Presentation, inspiration and motivation have always played a key role in the
success of any venture. The completion of this project requires a lot of guidance
and assistance from many people.

Primarily, I would like to thank God for being able to complete this project with
success. Then, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my professor
PROF. GULSHAN KUMAR, University institute of legal studies, Chandigarh
who gave me the opportunity, encouragement, valuable suggestions and fruitful
guidance to do this project. Class lecture helped me a lot to understand the topic
and complete the project successfully on topic,

“MOOTING: ARGUEMENTIVE SKILLS”

I feel to acknowledge my indebtedness and deep sense of gratitude to the entire

faculty of department of legal studies, from where I learnt the basics of law. All
the informal discussions and intellectual support helped me in the entire duration
of this work.

Charu Lata

Sem. 6, section D
 CONTENTS

Sr. no. Particulars Page no.

1. Introduction 1
2. Relevance and importance 1-3
3. Argumentative skills 3
4. Essentials of Argumentative skills 4-5
5. Need of Argumentative skills 5
6. Do’s and don’t’s 6-7
7. Development of skills 8
8. Tips to keep in mind 8-10
9. Important inclusions 10
10. Advocacy skills 11-12
11. Conclusion 13

MOOTING: ARGUMENTATIVE SKILLS INTRODUCTION

Mooting is an imitation of a court hearing wherein participants analyse a problem,
research for relevant laws, prepare written submissions and present an oral
argument. Moot problems are generally based on unsettled law or on recent
developments.

Mooting is a form of an Oral proceeding similar to that of a court proceeding

practiced mainly in institutions and universities where law as a subject is taught to
see that how efficient a student is in fighting an argument based on law. In this a
proper court scenario is created where the students act like the Counsels
(Advocates) presenting each side (Plaintiff and Defendant) on the basis of
evidences and substantive questions of law argue with each other to prove their
point in front of the judge who in the end will give his judgment in the same regard
and will also declare the winner who has performed the best. Also, while
presenting their arguments the judge can question them on facts or question them
on any of the legal concepts to check the aptitude and in prompt adaptability to the
situation of the student.

In India, mooting started when the Bar Council of India organised Bar Council of
India Moot Court in 1981. In 1985, moot court learning became a basic part of
Indian legal education. Since that time, mooting is followed in Indian Law
Institutes.

RELEVANCEAND IMPORTANCE OF MOOTING

Since mooting as an activity requires a lot of time, hard work and efforts from all
the team members, it is only fair that you have sound reasons to take up mooting.
Everybody has a different motivation to moot, but understanding the most common
reasons as to why people take up mooting can provide reason to your own belief to
take up mooting.

1. Critical and analytical skills- The inherent nature of Mooting is such that it
involves analysis of facts, sifting of the material facts from immaterial ones,
carving out the contentious issues, and conducting research on them. This
whole process helps a participant achieve the analytical skils as he/she learns
to raise perplexing questions and seeks to find an answer to them, all by her
own efforts.
2. Appreciate diverse perspectives - Mooting teaches a person to have a holistic
view of a problem in hand and evaluate both the strengths and weaknesses of a
case. Since a moot court requires preparation from both sides to be made, it
requires interpretation and re-interpretation of the same provisions of law to
suit both sides in a case.

3. Enhances public speaking -In a profession like law, public speaking is a

good to have skill Mooting provides a participant with an excellent platform to
polish one's speaking skills before they enter into the profession.

4. Learning beyond the classroom- The real practice of law cannot be served
only by bare provisions of law and the plethora of case laws that are taught in
the confines of the classroom. (Even though the Bare and the Case Law still
are crucial readings for both the law student and the lawyer, a diligent student
must take part in activities that bridge the gap between classroom learning and
real world application. Mooting helps in bridging this gap by introducing the
participants to an application based learning of law.

5. Industry knowledge- Irrespective of the outcome of a moot competition, a

participant can be assured that the mooting experience will help him in gaining
a vast knowledge of subject matter of the moot. The experience will broaden
his knowledge of subject matter involved in the moot and help him in getting
an edge over other peers in that particular area of law.

6. CV Building- Since skills like research, drafting and advocacy are

indispensable for any practice of law, a good track record in mooting sort of
ticks all the boxes that lawyers/law firms look out for in a prospective
candidate A prior mooting history further reflects a participant's inclination
towards academic pursuits and demonstrates that he has spent his time
fruitfully in the college. Further, a student can build a great CV by
strategically choosing moots competitions in the area of law she wishes to
work in future. The choice of his moot court competitions will provide a fillip
to his professional endeavours in the field.
 7. Litigation experience- Mooting is the closest real world courtroom
experience that you can have as a student. It equips you with crucial advocacy
skills which can help you not just in your endeavours in a competition, but
also in your lawyering life.

8. Networking and Internship Opportunities- Many moot court competitions

are organized by law firms, or have good litigators, judges, corporate Lawyers
as their judges. If you do well in a moot court competitions, your performance
can translate into internship offers. Go up to a judge, introduce yourself
formally, and get into an intelligent conversation.

ARGUMENTATIVE SKILLS
Definition: Argumentation is a very logical way of discussing or debating an
idea. When we use this technique of argumentation, we prove something to be
true or false.

Argumentation uses logic, persuasion and various debates tactics to arrive at a

conclusion. When a debater/ lawyer or negotiator follows the rules of
argumentation, he/she backs up the ideas with very systematic, careful reasoning
that makes his/her conclusion strong and believable. From the 15th century,
argumentation has meant "presentation of formal oral arguments," from the Latin
root argumentationem, "the bring forth of a proof."

Argumentation is a course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating a truth or

falsehood i.e., a process of logical reasoning.

Argument concerns itself with neither fact nor taste, but with that vast middle
territory of statements that are more or less probable. An arguable statement can
evoke degrees of adherence, and its grounds of support do not depend on the
individual who holds them.

THE FOUR ESSENTIALS

Every argument has four essential elements:
1. A thesis statement, a claim, a proposition to be supported, which deals with
a matter of probability, not a fact or a matter of opinion.

Thesis Statement: Every argument, no matter how complicated, has a

single, overriding thesis. That thesis may be qualified, elaborated,
complicated, or hedged all around, yet the arguer must always be able to
answer the "What is your point?"... Al arguments can be summed upon a
single statement that the whole discourse is designed to support... Whether
the unit of argument is a paragraph or a book, that basic element, the thesis
statement, must be discoverable.

2. An audience to be convinced of the thesis statement.

Audience: An argument needs a human audience to convince. .. The

particular audience of an argument influences how you argue-coolly or with
passion, tentatively or with strong conviction, elliptically or in great
detail. ... Thus, different audiences require significant differences in the
support, organization, and working of your argument.

3. Exigence: the need to make an argument at a certain time, in a circumstance,

or for a purpose.

Exigence: In order for a real argument to occur there must be some forum
and Occasion, like a town meeting, some push in the time and circumstances
and some purpose for making claims and supporting them. The combination
of all these factors has been called the exigence. ... To compensate for [the
often] inherent disconnection from its audience, a written argument must
frequently create its own exigence.

4. Grounds, reasons, or, as they are sometimes formally called, premises that
support the thesis.

Support: also called premise(s). Support is the reason(s) for an audience to be

convinced of the thesis statement. You should follow the thesis with at least one
reason or "because" statement. You may make much longer arguments by
 introducin8 more supporting statements for the thesis or by supporting the
supporting statements themselves, but at least one premise, one statement that
gives the audience a reason to adhere to the thesis, is necessary. An unspoken
premise is called an "assumption." Assumptions are common ground, shared
preconceptions and beliefs of arguer and audiences. The five main elements in
broad elements of argumentation are reason; evidence; warrant;
acknowledgement and response.

NEED OF ARGUMENTATIVE SKILLS

Arguments have two main purposes that are as follows:

1. Change people 's (opponent party and judge) point of view or persuade them
to accept new points of view.
2. Persuade people (opponent party and judge) to a particular action or new
behaviour.

The main reason is because people don't always agree on what is right or
reasonable, appropriately constructed argument helps us arrive at what is fair or
true. It is used to settle disputes and discover truth. Instructors assign
argumentative writing so students can learn to examine their own and other's ideas
in a careful, methodical way. Argument teaches us how to evaluate conflicting
claims and judge evidence and methods of investigation. Argument helps us learn
to clarify our thoughts and articulate them honestly and accurately and to consider
the ideas of others in a respectful and critical manner.

Summing up it all, "The purpose of argument is to change people's point of view or

to persuade people to a particular action or behaviour."

DO'S AND DON'T OF ARGUMENTATIVE SKILLS

DO'S:
1. Stay calm. Even if you get passionate about your point you must stay cool and
in command of your emotions. If you lose your temper - you lose.

2. Use facts as evidence for your position. Facts are hard to refute so gather
some pertinent data before the argument starts. Surveys, statistics, quotes from
relevant people and results are useful arguments to deploy in support of your
case.

3. Ask questions. If you can ask the right questions you can stay in control of the
discussion and make your opponent scramble for answers. You can ask
questions that challenge his point, What evidence do you have for that claim?"
You can ask hypothetical questions that extrapolate a trend and give your
opponent a difficulty, 'What would happen if every nation did that?" Another
useful type of question is one that calmly provokes your foe, What is about this
that makes you so angry?"

4. Use logic. Show how one idea follows another. Build your case and use logic
to undermine your opponent.

5. Appeal to higher values. As well as logic you can use a little emotion by
appealing to worthy motives that are hard to disagree with, 'Shouldn't we all be
working to make the world better and safer for our children?"

6. Listen carefully. Many people are so focused on what they are going to say
that they ignore their opponent and assume his arguments. It is better to listen
carefully. You will observe weaknesses and flaws in his position and
sometimes you will hear something new and informative!

7. Be prepared to concede a good point. Don't argue every point for the sake of
it. If your adversary makes a valid point then agree but outweigh it with a
different argument. This makes you looked reasonable. I agree with you that
prison does not reform prisoners. That is generally true but prison still acts
effectively as a deterrent and a punishment.
8. Study your opponent. Know their strengths, weaknesses, beliefs and values.
You can appeal to their higher values. You can exploit their weaknesses by
turning their arguments back on them.

9. Look for a win-win. Be open-minded to a compromise position that

accommodates your main points and some of your opponent's. You cannot both
win ina boxing match but you can both win in a negotiation.

DON'T:

1. Get personal. Direct attacks on your opponent's lifestyle, integrity or honesty

should be avoided. Attack the issue not the person. If the other party attacks
you then you can take the high ground e.g. I am surprised at you making
personal attacks like that. I think it would be better if we stuck to the main
issue here rather than maligning people.

2. Get distracted. Your opponent may try to throw you off the scent by
introducing new and extraneous themes. You must be firm. That is an entirely
different issue which I am happy to discuss later. For the moment let's deal
with the major issue at hand.'

3. Water down your strong arguments with weak ones. If you have three
strong points and two weaker ones then it is probably best to just focus on the
strong. Make your points convincingly and ask for agreement. If you carry on
and use the weaker arguments then your opponent can rebut them and make
your overall case look weaker.

DEVELOPMENT OF ARGUMENTATIVE SKILLS

 1. Don't forget to remain calm at all times: There are not very many people in
the world that like to be yelled at. You can be sure of this. So, why do you
do it? It is important to try to not get upset and always maintain a relaxed
attitude in a supportive environment, You have to remember at all times than
an argument a contrast between to points of view.
2. Arguing well is the same as building or creating.
3. Imposition is completely the opposite of arguing: The conversation should
always be governed by understanding or mutual agreement.
4. Active listening is necessary to any discussion: As it helps one to. Be much
more productive to understand other points of view and to be able to contrast
them with your own,
5. Forgiveness and apologizing are the perfect tools to a good argument.

TIPS TO BE KEPTIN MIND WHILE ARGUING

COVER ALL POINTS
RESPOND TO THE PROBABLE
COUNTER

ENGAGE WITH JUDGES

JUDGE THE JUDGE

COVER ALL POINTS

RESPOND TO THE PROBABLE
COUNTER
1. Be Assertive: While making your submissions be assertive and confident. It
is also to be noted that words like might, could, would be etc. go against
your case and show that you are not confident about your claim yourself.
And always be sure of what you argue, because if you are not sure, then how
can the court be??
2. Assert but with due respect: Your arguments as mentioned have to be
assertive but there is a thin fine line between strong. respectful submissions
and dis-respectful, emotive submissions. A speaker should definitely keep in
mind that the court and only the court has the power to grant the relief, and
for which, being respectful is important.

3. Engage with the Judges: It is your duty to keep the judges engaged. An
example of which is as follows: "My Lords. I would like to ask myself a
question at this juncture, when my client, the accused, has an alibi of being
at a different place than the place of incident at the time when such crime
was committed, how can the prosecution rope in an innocent man and make
such grave allegations? Further doesn't this go on to prove that not only is
my client innocent but also the fact the investigation agency has not done its
work properly? By posing such questions, you will be making the judges
think, and half of the battle would be won. They will then scrutinize the
submissions of the other side accordingly and appreciate your submissions
in a better way.

4. Judge the Judge: While making your submissions, it is expedient to note as

to how the judges are responding to your argument. When the judge does not
seem to be inclined towards your submissions, it is a cue for you to move on
to the next submission. Sticking to the same submission will be
counterproductive both in terms of time and your marks.

5. Cover all points: More the arguments, more there is a chance of convincing
a judge to respond and decide in your favour. The notes which you make,
allow you to note all the points which need to be mentioned and it is crucial
to mention all the points during your submissions.

6. Respond to the probable counters during your submissions itself: The

beauty of a moot competition is that it makes you prepare for both sides.
However, during the course of arguments, you will be representing one side
only. Use the knowledge of the plausible arguments which would have been
made by the opposition and counter them during the submissions. Example:
"My Lords, the Respondents will be contending that my client commited the
 crime. However, what has to be noted is that there is no toto of evidence to
bind the circumstantial evidence in a chain so inex tricably connected to
form a belief of my client committing the crime. During the course of my
arguments, I will prove that the expert report which is the sole evidence, in
no manner proves the guilt of my client."

By doing this one has:

a. Weakened the case of your adversary by showing that the respondent would
be replying on a specific evidence; and
b. That the evidence so relied upon. does not have much material bearing. This
would also allow the judges to appreciate your arguments in a better manner
and scrutinize the opposite counsel's argument in a better manner in your
favour.

IMPORTANT INCLUSIONS:
1. Use punchy one-liners. You can sometimes throw your opponent out of his
stride by interjecting a confident, concise cliché. Here are some good ones:
That begs the question. That is beside the point. You're being defensive. Don't
compare apples and oranges. What are your parameters?
2. Deliberately provoke your adversary. Find something that makes them
angry and keep wheedling away on this point until they lose their temper and
so the argument
3. Distract. Throw in diversions which deflect the other person from their main
point.
4. Exaggerate your opponent's position. Take it way beyond its intended level
and then show how ridiculous and unreasonable the exaggerated position is.
5. Contradict confidently. Vigorously denounce each of your opponent's
arguments as fallacious but just select one or two that you can defeat to prove
the point. Then assume that you have won.
ADVOCACY SKILLS

Eye contact
Comprehensive
Use of gestures Argument

Never cut off or

Necessary Facts Only
interrupt the judge

Tone and Tenor

rebuttal
of Speaker
Voice modulation

A moot competition is not won simply by great legal arguments but by

persuasiveness of the counsel. Your attempt is to show a good understanding of the
law, facts and strong advocacy. For good advocacy you have to practice again and
again, for the reason that practice makes a person perfect. The aim of making an
argument is to make it as effective and conducive as possible. Once you have
researchcd, drafted and prepared your arguments. All one needs to do now is to
persuade the court to decide in their client's favour

1. Clear, Comprehensive Argument: The argument should be made in a clear,

and comprehensive terms with utmost sincerity and without any exaggerated
display of rhetoric and emotive contentions.
2. Necessary Facts Only: Do not address facts unless they are absolutely
necessary for your argument. Reserve and manage time for submissions that
matter.
3. Tone and Tenor of Speaker: While putting forth an argument, one should be
audible enough and speak with a pace which allows the court to take note of
your submissions.

4. Make eye contact: They say if you look into someone's eye while saying
something, it shows that you have nothing to hide from them. Eye contact
while making submissions is a must. It shows your sincerity, dedication and
commitment.

5. Voice modulation: Nani A. Palkhiwala, Ram B. Jethmalani, Harish Salve are

names you have surely heard of. Apart from being the best legal minds, they
also had one great-great quality. i.e. Voice Modulation. This quality goes a
long way in persuading the judges and feel connected to your argument.

6. Never cut off or interrupt the judge: While making your submission, the
judges will throw you off with their argunments and it is crucial to not
interrupt the judge. It is for the speaker to calmly understand the question and
assist the court with the answer. Interrupting the judge will not only show
disrespect but would also show that you're trying to be a know-all person.

7. Use of gestures: Use of gestures forms an important part of your body

language. Coupled with proper voice modulation, it would allow you to
convey your point in an effective manner.

8. Rebuttal: Rebuttals are made after both the sides have argued their case and
this is an opportunity to render the opposite side's case ineffective. The parties
should during the course of the opposing counsel's arguments, note down
points which would be referred to during the rebuttal. Since the time for
rebuttal is minimal, the speaker should be concise and to the point. One should
hit where it hurts, i.e. the aim of the rebuttal is to shake down the argument of
the other side and ensure a favourable outcome, for which it is expedient to
crisply choose the point which forms the backbone of their argument.
CONCLUSION
"Arguing Well Is Not The Same As Winning”.

In order to argue well you have to keep in mind that the situation never stops being
a conversation. It is not a competition let's not forget the great phrase uttered by the
French writer Joseph Joubert, "The goal in any discussion shouldn't be triumphed,
but progressed." The participants can mutually enrich themselves if there attitude
in the argument is a positive and constructive one. On the contrary, the positions
held by the participants will be ever more distant. Mutual benefits will turn into
anger, impotence and rage.

Thus, never forget that arguing well doesn't have to have negative aspects. You can
avoid this if the attitude with which you face this situation is the appropriate one.
With patience, understanding and a willingness to learn with others and enrich
your points of view, every thing is much more convenient.