[Live Updates] : 5th NLIU Justice R. K. Tankha Memorial International Arbitration Moot Court Competition

Court 1

Court room no. 1

Judges- S. Muneeswaran, Hita Kumar and Praharsh Johorey

Teams-

Claimant- TC 28 SLS Noida

Speakers- Aman Shankar and Shrishti Vatsa

Researchers- Vanshika Arora

Respondent- TC 8 RMLNLU

Speakers- Kaustaubh Srivastava and Siddhanta Ahuja

Researcher- Devansh Rathi, Ravi Shankar Pandey

The much awaited Quarter Finals have begun. These rounds have been opened for the audience. The round started with the respondents presenting their case first. The judges started barging them with questions from the very first minute. Looks like it is going to be an intense round.

The Quarter Finals have begun. The following teams have qualified (in no particular order):

RMLNLU, Lucknow

ILS, Pune

SLS, Noida

SLS, Pune

TNNLS, Tiruchirappalli

RGNUL, Patiala

NUALS, Kochi

HNLU, Raipur

Courtroom 8

Courtroom 9

Judges: Manini Brar and Nandita Chauhan

Team code 25

Speaker 1: Rahila Iftekhar

Speaker 2: Vaishnavi Naik

Team code 28

Speaker 1: Aman Shankar

Speaker 2: Srishti Vatsa

The mood of the round is relaxed so far. The second speaker of the claimants are answering the questions raised by the judges. The judges are grilling the second speaker. She is however confidently answering every question.

The judges have pointed out the contradiction in two arguments presented by the second speaker. The speaker after clarifying her stance, has moved further to her next line of arguments.

Court room 1

Judges: Shreya Sircar

Addway Bandhopadhyay

CLAIMANTS

TEAM CODE:TC20

COLLEGE:Pravin Gandhi College of Law

SPEAKERS- Shachi Shah, Viraj Chhelandra

RESEARCHERS 1. Ashnav Sinha

2.Tej Lapsiya

RESPONDENTS

TEAM CODE:TCO8

COLLEGE:RMLNLU

SPEAKERS 1.Kaustab Srivastava

2.Siddharth Ahuja

RESEARCHERS 1. Devansh Rathi

2.Ravi Shankkar Pandey

The round followed a structure wherein the claimants first argued and then put forth their rebuttals. The judges tried to confuse the speakers with their questioning which seemed to make the teams nervous.

Court Room: 3

Judges: Kavita Singh; Harpreet Singh

Team Code: 16 (TNNLU) (Respondents)

Speakers: Sethupathy Rathna Kumar B; Aishwaryaa A

Researchers: Sreelakshmi B; Sashinyaa R

The team for the Claimants could not arrive on team and was thus, disqualified. Nonetheless, the judges proceeded with the Respondent's side of submissions. Mr. Harpreet started with the questions as soon as the submissions began but the speaker proceeded with his contentions diligently.

Court Room No. 19

Respondent says that it's not thefundamental breach of contract. Judge asked whether he can justify the terms the terms of the documents he signed.

Courtroom 8

The judges demand the proof of termination notice from the counsel . Counsel displayed some hesitance in in answering.

The rebuttals follow and errors are pointed by the Claimants in the Respondent's submissions. The round has come to an end after the respective prayers.

Courtroom 8

Claimant's arguments have left the judges somewhat confused and it seems that the arguments are not acceptable to them. The judges remark that the counsel is refuting her own arguments. Respondent 2 shall now agrue the remaining 3 issues in a period of 18 minutes.