MOOT COURT CASEAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

Case for Riga Moot 2016

Problematics with the Refugee Question in the Bundorff Sea

1. The Bundorff Sea is a very large area of water with no known islands. It has roughly the shape of an ellipse, whose major axis (east-to-west) measures around 1,000 nautical miles, and whose minor axis (north-to-south) measures around 800 nautical miles. To both sides the basin opens to the oceans. The two landmasses north and south of the Bundorff Sea belong to the Northern Continent and to the Southern Continent. The coastal States, in clockwise direction, are Wistelia, Arcadia and Fixteria in the Northern Continent, and Brustolia and Mangelia, in the Southern Continent. All of the States have claimed 200 nautical miles of their exclusive economic zones, so that the high seas remain in the middle of the Bundorff Sea.

2. Wistelia, Arcadia and Fixteria are Members of an international organization – the Mutual Economic and Trade Community (METC), which operates similarly to the European Union. Twenty other Member States also belong to the METC.

3. Brustolia faces a non-international armed conflict, which involves government forces and the opposition forces of Brustolia as well as the Frethonian religion fundamentalist movement, which has gained control over vast territories both in Brustolia and elsewhere. Millions of Brustolians are forced to leave their country to escape from war and from situations when civilians are used as living shields. The Frethonian religion fundamentalist movement also enforces mass capital punishment against Brustolians. Some Brustolians have left their homes and settled elsewhere in Brustolia, while many other Brustolians have gone to neighbouring States, where they are settled in huge refugee camps and often lack food and medicine. Many Brustolians have decided to seek resettlement further in the Northern Continent, choosing Wistelia across the Bundorff Sea.

4. Brustolians are sacrificing their last financial means to buy old shipping vessels for a one-way trip across the Bundorff Sea. Usually they are accompanied by other State nationals looking for better lives. There have been occasions when overcrowded vessels sink in the deep of the Bundorff Sea, with the loss of many lives, but hundreds of thousands still reach the coasts of Wistelia.

5. In 2015, when the non-international armed conflict protracted and intensified, the Wistelian authorities were not able to host, register and settle the fleeing Brustolians. However, they are still arriving in Wistelia. The problem is intensified by the fact that many non-registered Brustolians are proceeding further to other - METC Member States, which are afraid that, along with the Brustolian refugees, inidividuals from the Frethonian religion fundamentalist movement can flow into their countries, thus posing new terrorist threats. Several METC Member State intelligence agencies confirm that this information is well-grounded.

6. In September 2015, the METC Council adopted a binding decision on the basis of solidarity to relocate Brustolians from Wistelia to all other METC Member States, including Arcadia and Fixteria. On their part, Arcadia and Fixteria are not satisfied with the decision, stating that the METC does not have competence to decide on the relocation of Brustolians. Moreover, Mangelia (which is not a METC Member State but has expressed its intent to join the METC) comes into play. Mangelia has reached a deal with the METC that the METC pays financial compensation to Mangelia, and receives into the METC only Brustolians who qualify under the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (including the 1967 New York Protocol) and send all other migrants back to Mangelia. Arcadia and Fixteria are also not content with this situation, as they say it is contrary to the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.

7. Wistelia, Arcadia and Fixteria are parties to the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. All States mentioned in the case are parties to the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (including the 1967 New York Protocol).

8. Arcadia and Fixteria submit a complaint against the METC Council to the Court of the European Union claiming that:

a) the METC Council was not competent to adopt a binding decision on the basis of solidarity to relocate the Brustolians from Wistelia to all other METC Member States;

b) the METC Council’s deal with Mangelia violates the obligations arising out of the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (including the 1967 New York Protocol), as all refugees have freedom to choose where to settle and collective expulsion of aliens is not permitted.

9. The METC Council claims that:

a) the METC Council was competent to adopt a binding decision to relocate the Brustolians from Wistelia to all other METC Member States;

b) the MTEC Council’s deal with Mangelia does not violate the obligations arising out of the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (including the 1967 New York Protocol), as the MTEC is not a Member State of the 1951 Convention.

RGSL Riga Moot 2016

Rules of Procedure

A. General Rules

1. Competition 1.1. RGSL Riga Moot 2016 (hereinafter – Competition) is organised by the RGSL

Student Association and RGSL administration and is open to all university bachelor and master students.

1.2.The Competition is organized in the format of European Union Court procedure. These rules shall determine the main procedural aspects of this particular Competition.

1.3. The Competition consists of written and oral part.

2. Judges of the Competition 2.1. The Competition is judged by the RGSL permanent and visiting faculty

members as well as other professional invitees. 2.2.The written part of each team will be judged by three judges. 2.3.The oral arguments of each team will be judged by three judges. 2.4.Each moot court chooses its president of the court session. If the moot court

cannot make a choice for the president of the session, it is determined by a secret ballot.

3. Competition participants 3.1. Teams of no more than four participants, but no less than three participants

are entitled to apply for the Competition. 3.2. Only participants of the Competition shall be the authors of their

argumentation.

4. Coaches 4.1. Teams may have coaches. Judges of the Competition cannot be coaches for

the teams. 4.2. The team coach may consult the team: generally on the topic, recommend the

relevant research methods, generally consult on writing the argumentation and on presenting the arguments. It is prohibited for the team coach to develop the arguments in the place of the Competition participants.

4.3.The disregard of the rules established in Clause 4.1 or 4.2 may result in the disqualification of the team.

5. Application for participation in the Competition 5.1. Teams shall submit their applications for participation in the Competition by

1 April 2016. 5.2. Each team is writing a written memorial on both positions – the Applicants

and the Respondents. 5.3.The organizers will assign participation numbers for each team. 5.4. The deadline for the submission of written memorials is 2 May 2016. 5.5. If the memorial has been submitted after the deadline, the organizers of the

Competition take decision of whether to permit the team to participate in the Competition.

5.6. By submitting the written memorial by e-mail, the team mentions the team participants, team participation number, the captain of the team as well as the telephone number and e-mail address for communication.

5.7.The communication with the organizers shall be carried out by the captain of the team.

5.8. The organizers shall communicate with the team participants via the e-mail address of the captain of each team.

6. Case publication The case will be published in the RGSL official website, Facebook page Riga Moot 2016 and elsewhere.

B. Written Part of the Competition

7. Form and contents of case analysis 7.1. Case analysis shall be written in academic legal English in accordance with

its grammar and style requirements. References shall be formatted in their original language.

7.2.Case analysis shall consist of the following parts: 7.2.1. Contents; 7.2.2. List of authorities; 7.2.3. Brief description of the facts of the case; 7.2.4. Summary of case analysis; 7.2.5. Case analysis. 7.3.The case analysis shall not exceed the length of 20 pages (excluding the Cover

page, Contents, List of authorities, Brief description of the facts of the case, Summary of case analysis).

7.4.The case analysis shall be formatted on A4 pages on one side, observing the following requirements:

7.4.1. Space between the lines – 1.5; 7.4.2. Font Times New Roman, size 12; size for references – 10;

7.4.3. Margin of 2.5 cm on both sides and margin of 2.5 cm at the top and at the bottom

7.5.The title page shall indicate only the team number. The possibility to identify the authors of the memorial shall be excluded throughout the text.

8. Case analysis submission The case analysis shall be submitted by 2 May 2016, at 23:59 to the e-mail address: rigamoot@rgsl.edu.lv.

C. Oral Part of the Competition

9. Participants of the oral part of the Competition All teams that have submitted their written parts participate in the oral part of the Competition.

10. Date and place of the Competition Moot court Competition takes place at the premises of the RGSL on 2-3 June 2016.

11. Language of the Competition The Competition shall be held in English.

12. Rounds of the Competition 12.1. The Competition shall take place in three rounds: 12.1.1. Preliminary rounds, where each team participates in moot court once; 12.1.2. Semi-final, where four teams, who have got the highest evaluation for the

written memorial and preliminary rounds; 12.1.3. Final, where two teams participate, nominated by the vote of judges after

the semi-finals.

13. Division of positions 13.1. Each team participates at the preliminary rounds only once according

to their position. 13.2. The division of positions shall be determined by the organizers taking

into accounts the evaluations for the written memorials. 13.3. The counter-memorial of the other team is sent to the respective team 2

days before the preliminary rounds.

14. Attendance during oral rounds 14.1. All team participants shall equally take part in the oral rounds. 14.2. In case there is insufficient number of either Applicant or Respondent

teams, then either Applicant or Respondent team presents its arguments alone.

14.3. All others, but not the teams shall participate as attendants for preliminary rounds.

14.4. Filming or making other records shall be allowed only with the permission of the organizers.

15. The course of Competition 15.1. The Competition shall take place in accordance with the following

procedure: 15.1.1. First – the arguments are presented by the Applicant – for no longer than

20 minutes; 15.1.2. Second – the arguments are presented by the Respondent – for no longer

than 20 minutes; 15.1.3. Then – the rebuttal is presented by the Applicant – for no longer than 5

minutes; 15.1.4. Then – the surrebuttal is presented by the Respondent – for no longer than

5 minutes. 15.2. In the Final the time prescribed in Clauses 15.1.1. and 15.1.2. shall be

40 minutes. 15.3. Time is not stopped and is continued to be counted when the judges are

posing questions and when the participants are responding. 15.4. The speaker is not entitled to consult with the other team members

while presenting his/her argument. 15.5. The participants may ask the court to permit additional time to

complete their argument. 16. The contents of the presentation

The participants may change their arguments in the oral rounds in comparison with their written argumentation.

17. Communication during the moot court 17.1. Communication among the moot court participants shall be carried out

not disturbing the moot court process. 17.2. Communication between the team members and the attendants shall be

prohibited.

D. Evaluation

18. Evaluation of the case analysis 18.1. Cases analysis are evaluated by the Competition judges. Additional

experts may be invited to evaluate the written memorials. 18.2. Case analysis shall be evaluated according to the following criteria: 18.2.1. Knowledge of the facts and the legal principles directly applicable to the

facts – 20 points; 18.2.2. Proper and articulate analysis of the issues involved – 20 points;

18.2.3. Use of authorities – 20 points; 18.2.4. Clarity and organization – 20 points; 18.2.5. Grammar and style – 20 points. 19. Evaluation of the competition 19.1. Each judge shall assess each team’s performance according to the

following criteria: 19.1.1. Form of performance (oral performance, style, politeness, observance of

procedure) – 20 points; 19.1.2. Content of performance (validity of arguments, logics) – 20 points; 19.1.3. Responses to judges’ questions – 10 points; 19.1.4. Originality – 10 points; 19.1.5. Team work – 10 points. 19.2. Semi-finals are judged according to the criteria prescribed in Clause

19.1., but the points are not granted. Finalists are determined by vote. No judge shall abstain in the vote.

19.3. Final is judged according to the criteria prescribed in Clause 19.2., but the points are not granted. Winners are determined by vote. No judge shall abstain in the vote.

E. Final clauses

20. Prizes

The prize for winners’ team is financial contribution of 500.00 EUR (five hundred euros) from European Law Firm “Klotiņi and Serģis”.

21. Finitude of decisions Each decision taken by the judges shall be final and not subject to appeal. 22. Responsibility for non-observance of the Rules of Procedure 22.1. Each participant is entitled to submit to the organizers of the moot

court a written complaint, if any violation of the Rules of Procedure becomes known before the notification of the finalists.

22.2. The organizers of the moot court are entitled to deduct from the respective team no more than 20 points, however, in especially severe cases team disqualification is possible.

23. Appellate Council 23.1. The participants of the moot court are entitled to appeal the decisions

of the organizers at the Appellate Council. 23.2. The Appellate Council is formed by the RGSL Student Association.