Basic advice sounds simple: Do not be nervous about presenting the case!

If nothing else, it is just a competition. What is more, arbiters need you to present it; in fact, you do part of their job when you present the issue and subsequently even the ideas how to solve them. Therefore, stay calm and focused during whole hearing.

 

Crucial to remember:

• Your aim: Present the case and persuade the tribunal!
• Your method: Tell them your story as a guide, lead them carefully through bumpy road of facts and law to finally reach the conclusion you wish.
• Your concern: Do not let them lose the path, keep contact with tribunal and be sure they follow you.

 

Do not forget that tribunal usually decides the issue based on facts and only afterwards they look into the law if their "plum solution" could be reached. Therefore, be sure your submission is not just plain summary of applicable law! Although, it may be intellectually challenging to discuss legal nuances of the case, at the end of the day, factual nuances are the ones arbiters will remember.

To sum up, during your submission, you must:

1. Get the attention of the tribunal and secure it.
   • Present "red line" of the story.
   • Present a clear road map.
     
   • Use signals
   • Use your voice and body language ...
2. Get the tribunal to understand the case, and memorize the facts. 
   • Use plain English.
   • "KISS and bang".
   • Do not overparticularise.
   • Repeat what is important throughout your speech ...
3. Make the tribunal decide inevitably in your favor. 
   • Present alternatives that would lead to the same conclusion (all roads come to Rome).
   • Show your solution as the reasonable one (do not just state it, show it!).
   • Predict the submission made by opposing party, and deal with its strongest points.
   • Do address the weakness in your submission, before your opponent does ...

When you structure your oral submission, you will try to stick with the logic and organization of the written memorandum. This approach is of course proper, as under moot rules Section 60 states than in the first hearing, you should rely on your written submission. However, that does not mean you must copy it completely. As the matter of fact, it is impossible to do. In approx. 15-20 minutes you are allowed to argue, it is not possible to deliver 17 pages of concise legal text or to deliver them in a way somebody will understand. Therefore, you must distil the essence of your written submission and indentify crucial factual and legal points. Once you have done this, start drafting your oral submission.

Regarding time aspects of the competition, you must make sure that crucial elements will be addressed, no matter the cost. It is advisable to prepare at least two styles of submission.

• First one, we may call it "emergency", must address all relevant issues in approx. one third of the time you are granted (include opening/closing statement).
• Second one, let's call it "full-bodied", shall be made for full amount of time you are granted (including opening/closing statement).

During the submission, there will be numerous factors influencing how much time you will be allowed to address the tribunal the submission you have prepared. Moreover, you cannot predict, which part the tribunal will start asking you questions in. The outcome of these considerations is simple, you must know both styles perfectly (knowing them by heart, of course).

Then, set certain "time checkpoints". On each such checkpoint, you must evaluate where you actually stand in the argument compared to the "full-bodied" ideal. (Here, team work comes to play).

Basically, the outcome of evaluation might be:

• If you run on time, move on freely.
• If you are ahead of schedule, slow down, elaborate on important issues or reapeat basic ideas.
• If you run behind the schedule, you must identify subarguments you may sacrifice, without compromising the logic of the argument.

Be sure to set a "death checkpoint". It often so happens that you get stuck with persistent arbiter who asks a million of questions. Suddenly, you realize that even though you answered these questions with excellence, there are 3 minutes left to address all remaining issues. In such a case, you must immediately switch to emergency style and be sure you address cardinal arguments. Moreover, do not hesitate to ask for additional time, this way you show the tribunal that you do manage your time.

Of course, you are not asked to master the styles and transfer from one to the other in the first hearing. It may be done just be persistent practice during our preparations and pre-moots. However, you must have an outline for both styles as soon as possible, so that you could start amending it to achieve perfection.