Interview with team who were runners up at the 11th NLU Antitrust Moot Court Competition 2020.
- shrey singh
- Mar 20, 2020
- 5 min read
I am Ritum Kumar, a final-year student, along with my team mates Animesh Baweja (2nd year) and Nikhil Kumar (4th year) pursuing B.A. LL.B. from Lloyd Law College, Greater Noida. I and my team were runner up in 11th NLU Antitrust Moot Court Competition 2020.
What inspires you to moot and what was the reason behind choosing the concerned moot?
I maintain that participation in moots not just challenge you academically but personally as well. The engagement in these competitions allows to conduct in-depth research on a given area of law and to excel in the same. It not just help improve oratory skills but develop a sense of confidence to present arguments in a succinct and precise manner. In addition, it allows for an opportunity to interact with professionals from the industry and to share a learning platform with students from across the nation.
I chose the 11th NLU Antitrust Moot Court Competition 2020 in particular given my interest in competition law. This area of law intrigues me a lot and given the repute of the competition, I wanted to make sure that before I graduate, I do participate in the said competition.
Tell us about the brief of moot problem and issue involved?
The Proposition revolved around the provisions of Section 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. The most intricate part was the application of ‘Hub & Spoke’ cartel. The proposition was based on the working of food service aggregators and the indulgence in anti-competitive conducts by these food service aggregators resulting in contravention of provisions of the Competition Act. Another interesting aspect was where the Proposition highlighted the application of ‘Across Platform Parity Agreements’ which forms a necessary part of the aggregator sectors. In totality the Proposition challenged us in myriad ways and allowed us to develop reasoning on the factual scenario and essentially draw analogies from the developed jurisdictions such as the US and the EU.
Tell us about your preparation?
We invested around a month or less in the preparation of the Moot, where the primary research was focused on familiarising with the concepts and developing an understanding through thorough reading. We had strategized the drafting of the memorandum in a manner where we discussed our drafts on frequent occasions which not only allowed us to complete our memorandum on time but it ensued that the entire team was on the same page. Though managing the preparation alongside academics and internships posed some challenges, with strategizes which we had mutually devised, everything fell in place with little-to-no conflicts in the team.
How was the level of participation? how were judges,? whether they grilled you?
The format of the Moot is really challenging. The teams we competed against were equally prepared and well versed both on facts and law. The approach and the structure with which we presented our case made some difference for us, and essentially the manner in which we engaged the judges is something which I feel gave us an upper hand.
The judges in the competition were amongst the best set of judges I have ever pleaded before. The judges not only knew the Proposition inside out but were familiar with every case law which we cited given their experience in the industry. This in particular was exciting because while we cited the case laws, the judges were intrigued to know about the relevance of the case and the application of the same in the case before them. In a few rounds the judges grilled us on every argument making it really engaging and participative from both the bar and the bench.
How was it like working with the team? Did you never have conflicts? If you did, how did you resolve them?
I don’t remember a single incident during the entire preparation which I would call as conflict. Since we had mutually decided as to how we would go about the entire preparation and had divided the work accordingly, it ensured that there did not arise any conflicts. Also, given that we had less than a month to complete our memorandums and prepare for our oral rounds as well, there actually was no time to fight about anything. The fact that the team was diversely composed in terms of the year of study provided for a healthy work environment where we learnt from each other’s experiences.
How many teams were you up against in the competition? Which team would you consider to be your toughest competition?
We were up against 7 teams up till the final rounds. All the teams were equally tough to compete with. However, we regard the team from National Law University, Delhi whom we faced in the semi-final rounds, as our toughest opponents.
Overall experience in brief?
The experience in totality was prodigious for me personally given that I’ll be graduating in a few months. Otherwise as well, National Law University is known for its transparent and fair conduct essentially when it comes to their ‘Antitrust Moot Court Competition’ which is the oldest moot conducted on competition law in India. It is rewarding in its own way for people who are especially interested in the said area of law. The hospitality at the University is welcoming. The Organising Committee and the student volunteers deserve a special mention for their round the clock support and friendly behaviour.
What advice would you give to your juniors about how to go through moot- how to prepare memo, giving mocks, researching etc.?
Pertinently, with my experience of moot court participations, what I have learnt is that this exercise requires all your heart and soul. The preparation is immensely tiring and satisfying at the same time. Not only do moots challenge you in innumerable ways but they help you go the extra mile to fetch fruitful results. The outcome of a moot, however, may not necessarily be in proportion to the efforts that you must have put into it, but the fact that you gave it your best shot clearly gives you the necessary satisfaction from within. So, it is advisable that learning should be the primary object and securing a position only secondary to it.
What is advantage of mooting and why should one choose mooting in college days?
The advantages are manifold. It allows for a national level participation where you compete with students of the similar age group from across the country. Not just that, it provides for a platform where you present your case, though hypothetical, before a bench which allows you get a taste of the legal profession. Further, conducting extensive research is always plus factor and the propositions are generally based on some contemporary issue, thus it affords the participants to have an edge over other with their in-depth research and understanding on the said area of law and the issue involved.
Comments