arguments Logical & given peruasive. 13-15 11-12 weight. Poor application of law to the facts. 9-10 8 Questions Accurately Accurately Unprepared Fails to perceives perceives the from the for questions perceive object of the object reasonably to the object Bench questioning. of be expected. of Clear responses; (20 for Evades engages with the team) answering. Responds court’s views. Responses Effectively to Poor integrates sometimes questions composure. too lengthy directly responses and Inflexible or or too argument. and brief. concedes too concisely. readily. Responses Handles lack clarity irrelevant or questions 9-10 directness. well. 7-8 5 6 Written Poorly Well Effectively Excellent presented. presented. outlines overview of Does not Outlines the the issue(s). outline key most issue(s). Used issues. issues Used authorities (20 for Does not effectively. authorities effectively, team) support case Used effectively, distinguishing effectively. authorities where Does not apply but with where necessary. necessary. Made law to facts. errors or Made Fails to omissions. excellent Made effective submissions properly to support consider the adequate to case. opponents’ arguments. to support Accurately support case. applied law to case. Accurately facts. Applied applied law law to to facts. facts. Considered considered & & responded to
8 arguments given weight. Poor application of law to the facts. 9-10 11-12 Logical & peruasive. 13-15 Questions from the Bench (20 for team) Unprepared for questions reasonably to be expected. Evades answering. Poor composure. Inflexible or concedes too readily. 5 Fails to perceive the object of Responses sometimes too lengthy or too brief. Responses lack clarity or directness. 6 Accurately perceives the object of Responds to questions directly and concisely. Handles irrelevant questions well. 7-8 Accurately perceives the object of questioning. Clear responses; engages with the court’s views. Effectively integrates responses and argument. 9-10 Written (20 for team) Poorly presented. Does not outline key issues. Does not support case effectively. Does not apply law to facts. Fails to properly consider the opponents’ arguments. Well presented. Outlines most issues effectively. Used authorities but with errors or omissions. Made adequate to support case. Applied law to facts. Effectively outlines the issue(s). Used authorities effectively, where necessary. Made effective to support case. Accurately applied law to facts. Considered & Excellent overview of the issue(s). Used authorities effectively, distinguishing where necessary. Made excellent submissions to support case. Accurately applied law to facts. considered & responded to
2016_Mooting_Guide_Rules_21092016.docx