Participating in a competitive moot can be one of the most rewarding experiences at law school. The Common Law Section offers a wide selection of moots covering different subject areas. While most moots test appellate advocacy skills, others require participants to demonstrate their abilities in trial, arbitration or other settings.
The moots in the upcoming 2017-2018 academic year are selected from the following list and will be announced during the moot information session. Budgetary restraints means we may not participate in all of the listed moots every year:
ENGLISH MOOTS and BILINGUAL MOOTS
- CML3165J - Arnup Cup (Criminal law – Leading to Sopinka)
- CML3120J4 - Julius Alexander Isaac Diversity Moot
- CML3120J5 - BowmanTax Moot
- CML3140J - Canadian Corporate/Securities Competition
- CML3923J - Coupe Laskin/Laskin Moot (Constitutional/Administrative law)
- CML3120FA - Foreign Direct Investment Moot
- CML3120WP - ICC Mediation Competition - International Mediation Advocacy Competition
- CML3120J200 - ICC Criminal Law Moot
- CML3125J - National Aboriginal Law Moot: Kawaskimhon "Speaking With Knowledge"
- CML3142J2 - Harold G. Fox Intellectual Property Moot
- CML 3142W3 - Intellectual Property Advocacy: Copyright Policy-making Moot
- CML3142F100 - Oxford International Intellectual Property
- CML3922J - Tribunal-école international Philip C. Jessup/Philip C. Jessup International Moot (Public International law)
- CML3119C - Walsh Negotiation Competition in Family Law (Prof. Rockman to send information in Fall)
- CML3128W - Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot
- CML3132J - Willms & Shier Environmental Law Moot
- CML3127J - Wilson Moot Competition (Equality s. 15)
- CML3139J - WTO/ELSA WTO Law Moot
- CML3514J - Concours Charles-Rousseau (Droit international public)
- CML3515J - Coupe Guy-Guérin (Droit pénal (Arnup, mais en français) – conduisant à Sopinka
- CML3524J - Tribunal-école Moncton-Ottawa (Droit privé)
This year's Mooting information session takes place Tuesday September 12, 2017 at 11:30, room FTX 359. This is an opportunity to learn more about our moot program, as well as the subject matter of the moots that are offered. Information on how to tryout for most moots will also be covered at this session.
How to tryout
If you intend to tryout for both English and French moots, you must submit separate English and French packages (if you intend to apply to both English and French moots) following the instructions.
Tryout packages must be left at FTX 237 by 4:30pm September 13. English moot tryout packages must be clearly addressed to Prof. Anthony Daimsis and French moot tryout packages must be clearly addressed to Prof. Denis Boivin.
We do not accept electronic submissions.
Packages must include in the following order:
- Cover letter indicating the moots for which you will tryout, in order of preference.
- CV (resume)
- Most recent law school transcript (student copy acceptable)
- Writing sample (in language of moot - 2 page max.)
- Current class schedule (course name and code), indicating all class times (start and finish)
We intend to hold tryouts from September 13-16. We make no exceptions and no make-up times. We will post sign up sheets on September 12. You may not reserve spots in advance. Sign up sheets for this year's English moots can be found on Prof. Daimsis's office door (Brooks 431).
English moots participating in this year's tryout are: WTO, Oxford IP, Jessup, Vis, Fox, Copyright.
Tryouts for Family law moots, Arnup, Aboriginal law, and ICC mediation and ICC international criminal law moots will take place separately. Look out for this information in your inbox and dictum.
French moot sign up sheets will be posted on Prof. Denis Boivin's office door.
French moots participating in this year's tryout (Saturday) are: Guy Guerin, Moncton, Rousseau and Laskin.
Walsh Family Law Negotiation Competition:
March 10th, 2018 in Toronto. Our school competes against 10 teams from the other Ontario law schools.
Students receive three credits in winter term.
TRY-OUTS FOR WALSH : BLG Negotiation Competition
Saturday, November 11th at BLG. The five winners of the BLG competition will comprise our team for the Walsh.
Try-out packages (Registration form and résumé) are due by 4pm Oct. 3rd. All upper year common law students will receive the information via Dictum.
Students with questions may contact Prof. Rockman: Lynn.Rockman@uottawa.ca.
BLG competition Problem (2017):
Apple computers inc. (Apple) is looking to capitalize on an important convergence of celebrations. To mark its 10 year smartphone anniversary and Canada’s 150th anniversary, Apple has decided to build and release a limited edition “iPhone-CAN 150!” in the hopes of capturing all non-iPhone users in Canada.
It has already chosen the company that will build the hardware but now seeks a company to handle the software needed to run the iPhone-CAN 150! To this end, it has sent out a call seeking offers from software companies. Apple seeks a company that must meet the following requirements:
1 Minimum experience: 10 years in software development
2 Must be solvent
3 Must be incorporated and have been operating in the United States of America for the last five years
The following three companies sent in their bids:
(a) Microsoft of America
(b) Oracle Corporation
(c) SAP AG of Germany
After carefully studying each bid, Apple selected SAP AG of Germany, a company not incorporated in the USA. According to the letters sent to Microsoft and Oracle, SAP had the most competitive bid and rather importantly, its management team appeared most attuned with Apple’s needs. For the sake of transparency, Apple also informed Microsoft that its bid was second best.
Microsoft is not happy about spending its time and money on a losing venture; it’s also not used to losing. Its chairman decides to summon the company’s lawyers to find a way to overturn Apple’s decision. He reminds them that Apple has attempted to protect itself by requiring disputes to be resolved before Canadian courts in accordance with Canadian law. Apple also included the following exclusion of liability clause, which reads in relevant part:
“No matter if Apple breaches any explicit or implicit obligations, parties submitting bids will have no recourse.”
For the avoidance of doubt, this clause was clearly brought to Microsoft’s attention before it made its bid and Microsoft is the world’s third largest software company.
Please take a position on whether this exclusion of liability will protect Apple should Microsoft seek legal recourse in overturning Apple’s decision.
Your argument may not exceed 7 minutes and you should expect questions.
Separate tryout process for the WALSH Family moot:
Walsh Family Law Moot Try Out Process
Upper year students interested in participating in a moot in the substantive area of family law are invited to apply for the Walsh Family Law Moot. The Walsh Family Law Moot will be held in mid-March in Toronto (date to be determined). Judges will include various members of the judiciary, including the Ontario Court of Appeal, the Superior Court of Justice, the Ontario Court of Justice as well as a number of senior members of the family law bar.
Most of the written materials for the moot course will be written during the January term with oral practices scheduled for the winter term.
To apply, you must have completed the "Introduction to Family Law Course" by December 2017 and submit the following to Prof Natasha Bakht, email@example.com, by September 27:
1) cover letter
2) law school transcripts (unofficial transcripts are available on uoZone)
3) completed Walsh moot try out problem (below)
4) based on the written materials, some students will also be asked to orally present their arguments (3 minutes) at a later date where judges will ask questions
For more information contact Prof Natasha Bakht
Walsh moot try out problem
Jennifer and Naseem, both residents of Ontario, were married on June 1, 2016. They had known each other for about a year before getting married and moving in together. In August 2016, while working on Naseem’s computer, Jennifer discovered some old photos and correspondences that suggested that seven years earlier Naseem had been a man named Naim. Jennifer felt betrayed and numb. She had no idea about any of this and was at a loss for what to do. After some time had passed and she discussed matters with her family, she found herself getting angrier about Naseem’s deception and being misled in such a fundamental way. She knew she wanted out of the marriage, so she moved out of their home on August 20, 2016 and decided to seek legal advice.
Naseem was initially embarrassed by her lie. She cared deeply for Jennifer and falling in love with her was the best thing that had happened to her. She had thought about telling Jennifer of her sex reassignment surgeries and previous life, but was worried about her reaction. Naseem had already lost the support of her family and some friends. Initially, Naseem tried to appease Jennifer and convince her that this new information did not change anything about what they shared. Increasingly though, as Naseem was confronted with Jennifer’s highly offensive and transphobic attitude, she too wanted out of the marriage.
Jennifer’s lawyer suggested to her that the marriage could be annulled. Naseem was keen to have the marriage recognized as valid, but wanted a divorce.
There are no children of the marriage. There are no issues of support or property division to be dealt with and the parties did not enter into any domestic contract.
Write a two-page submission to the Superior Court of Fauteux regarding Jennifer v Naseem arguing why the marriage should be found valid or not. You can choose the side you wish to argue. You may work in groups for the research, but the writing should be your own. This is due on: Wednesday September 27th by 4pm. Submissions should be emailed to firstname.lastname@example.org
You may also be asked to prepare a 3-minute oral submission based on your written arguments where you should be prepared to answer judges’ questions. The date of the oral arguments will be determined shortly. You will be contacted by email regarding the oral submission.