THE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG

FACULTY OF LAW

MOOTS

I. INTRODUCTION

Moots have a venerable role in the teaching of law. They are appeal arguments primarily
on points of law. The facts are given, as in a tutorial problem. There are no witnesses, so it
is not a mock trial. The student advocates present their contentions to the judges who
decide which view of the law should be applied to the facts. They also decide which
student is the best advocate and therefore winner of the moot. It is possible therefore to
lose on the merits of the case yet win the moot.

The benefit to a student from taking part in a moot lies partly in his or her preparation for,
and partly in his or her presentation at, the hearing. Before he or she appears in court he or
she must identify the issues, research the law, prepare authorities and plan arguments. He
or she will inevitably learn about the area of law concerned, but this is a side-benefit
compared with the advantages gained from having to organize one’s thoughts and material.
In our moots, where students argue in teams of two, each mooter should also learn the
benefits of cooperation with a partner.

Moots are designed to give mooters a relatively gentle introduction to court procedure and
to advocacy. Most legal practitioners have to appear before a court of tribunal during their
careers. Some love the excitement, most just learn to live with it. The moot is a chance for
you to see if you have a taste for advocacy and to learn more about it – not least, to learn
from your mistakes. The judges who hear your case understand this and appreciate that for
many of you this will be your first attempt at formal advocacy. They have been asked to
help you by giving comments and criticisms.

II. THE PROBLEM

Your problem has been drafted or checked by a member of the law faculty staff. They are
not infallible and there may be minor inconsistencies or lack of clarity in the facts or
judgment which you have been given. Remember that the problem is imaginary and simply
a vehicle from which you can display your forensic skills, or lack of them.

III. PREPARATION

Before starting your research, make sure you know which party you represent (appellant or
respondent) and that you understand the facts thoroughly. Also bear in mind that
preparation is essential to a good performance in court and that you will use only a fraction
of the material you uncover, not least because you have only a few minutes in which to
speak.

Take full advantage of your preparation time, thinking about your arguments and planning
your tactics. Remember to plan enough time for photocopying and to consider the
authorities and skeleton argument of your opponents.

1
Not all the facts are significant. Distinguish between those which are essential, that is,
which relate directly to an issue in the dispute, and those which are peripheral or merely
background detail. This is especially important for leading counsel for the appellant, who
may be asked to summarize the facts for the court.

Your next task will be to define the issue. You may be able to do this in a provisional way
from your general knowledge of the area concerned, but do not finalize your framing of the
issues until you have done research among the textbooks, digests and cases.

Once you have framed the issues, you and your partner should allocate issues. This should
be done fairly, so that each has something to argue. Be careful, however, to ensure you
understand your colleague’s part of the arguments, because the issues often overlap, and
the court may expect you to answer questions about your colleague’s submissions
(especially if you are leading counsel).

In relation to each issue try and summarize your arguments in clear simple submissions.
Plan to state them at the outset of your presentation, to provide an “anchor” and give the
judges something to hang onto if they should later become lost in the complexities of your
case. Your team’s submissions should of course be presented in logical order.

Once you have defined the issues, and completed your research, you will have to decide
what lies at the heart of the moot and which authorities you wish to rely on. You have only
twenty (20) minutes each (40 minutes per team) to support your submissions. Do not waste
time on repetition or on elementary matters. Concentrate on the main points. Many
advocates believe that it is good policy if possible to start with your best, that is, strongest,
point.

Decide which of your propositions are self-evident and which need to be supported by
authority. Carefully select the cases you are going to cite. Where possible try and use the
latest decision on a point, especially if it reviews earlier authorities, so that you don’t
necessarily need to mention those earlier decisions. Properly done, in twenty or so minutes,
you will be hard pressed to cite more than three or four cases in any detail.

Most of your submissions will concern the point(s) of law raised by the moot: what is the
law? Was it applied correctly to the facts? etc. You cannot challenge the facts that are
given, nor can you add to them (or invent convenient facts). But you are allowed to offer
different interpretations of the facts. For instance, the legal meaning of (but not the words
contained in) a party’s statement might be a proper matter dispute.

You will need to prepare the following documents for your moot:-

1. A skeleton argument of your team’s submissions

2. A list of authorities your team intends to rely on to give to the judges and to counsel
on the other side
3. Photocopies of authorities/relevant passages in a paginated bundle (usually in a
folder) for the judges.

2
The Department will have set deadlines and instructions regarding the format and when
you are to submit these documents. Please refer to the notices issued by the Department –
these requirements MUST be strictly complied with.

Preparing Your Skeleton Arguments

A skeleton argument is a written outline of your case. Your skeleton argument should
introduce the reader to the contentious issues the judges must determine at the moot. It
should contain the main arguments your team intends to raise. The skeleton argument
should also contain references to the authorities your team relies on.

Typically, a skeleton argument should contain a heading, an introduction, your submission

on each ground of appeal (in a summarized format) and a concluding paragraph. An short
example is contained in Appendix A.

Heading

The identity of the moot court and the parties should be identified in the Heading. You
should also identify the party on whose behalf the skeleton argument is being served.

Introduction

The introduction should contain a request as to how the court should deal with the appeal
(i.e. either allow or refuse the appeal). You may wish to highlight facts that support your
submissions in the introduction. It should not however be an overtly “biased” description
of the factual background.

Submissions

You should identify the grounds of appeal and summarise your team’s arguments on each
ground. Your submission should contain little or no refutation of your opponent’s case as
you do not know at this stage what their arguments would be.

Your submissions should be persuasive. It must also be concise, accurate and logical. You
should keep your submissions limited to the bare essence of your arguments. Address the
grounds of appeal in the order they appear in the moot problem. Raise your strongest point
first for each ground of appeal

Conclusion

You can end your skeleton arguments with your substantive submission and skip the
conclusion altogether. However, it may be worth concluding with a short sentence as what
you wish the Court to do.

Please ensure that you have set out on separate lines the names of the members of your
team in the order in which they will address the Court. Insert the date on which you serve
your skeleton argument.

3
Preparing Your Bundle of Authorities

The members of your team and the judges will need to have hard copies of the cases,
textbooks and articles your team refers to in your submissions.

Each judge should receive a bundle of the authorities before the start of the moot.

Remember to:-

1. Provide the correct version of the case reports;

2. Present the judge with the complete report (unless it is a particularly lengthy case
report – it may then be appropriate to hand up a “truncated” version containing the
headnote and a complete copy of all the judgment of the senior court, skipping the
pages containing arguments of counsel or summary of the judgment in the lower
court. Use your common sense!);
3. Photocopy sufficient pages from any textbooks or articles (if it is particularly long)
to provide context to any passages you are referring to;
4. Make sufficient copies for all judges as well as the members of your team;
5. Place your authorities in a ring binder/folder. LABEL the spine or the front of your
folder so the judge will know it is from your team;
6. Draft an index – it should contain the name of the parties and list the order of the
authorities they appear in the bundle. Provide full citation of each authority;
7. Tab each authority or paginate your bundle for ease of reference.

Notes for Your Oral Submissions

It is usually best to prepare your submissions in note form. Many advocates use simple
topic headings followed by a few key words, with references to the relevant pages of the
bundle written in at the relevant point in different coloured ink. This has many benefits –
your presentation will likely be simpler (and thus earlier to understand); you can switch
quickly from point to point in response to questions; you are likely to talk more slowly – all
in all you will be a better ADVOCATE. Do not prepare your argument like an essay and
then read it to the court. This is fatal. Write it out in preparation if necessary if this helps
you remember your case, but do not then simply read out the text to the court. If you do,
you show your lack of confidence, risk boring the judges and almost invite the judges to
intervene and ask you questions. There is more to advocacy than to reading a book or
delivering a lecture. Part of the art of persuasion lies in skill in delivery and in maintaining
the listeners’ interest.

IV. PROCEDURE OF THE MOOT COURT

(a) You will be appearing before the Supreme Mooting Court of Hong Kong.
For the purposes of the moot, this court is treated as being bound by no
precedent but will treat all decisions from common-law jurisdictions as
persuasive

4
(b) Counsel should stand when the judges enter the court. When the judges
take their place, counsel should bow to the judges who will respond in the
same way, whereupon everyone may be seated. Counsel for the appellants
should normally sit on the right-hand side of the bar table in the courtroom,
facing the judges’ bench.

(c) Since there is no registrar or clerk, the judges may read out the names of the
parties.

(d) Leading counsel for the appellant (or party seeking relief) should stand
when the judges are ready and announce his or her name and that he or she
appears for the party concerned. He or she will then introduce his or her
junior. Thus, “May it please my Lords (or “my Ladies” if all female panel
of judges – stick with using “my Lords” if your are appearing before a
mixed gender panel of judges), my name is X, I appear for the
appellant/plaintiff... with my learned friend, Mr/Miss...” Stand straight,
speak slowly and clearly, and focus on the judges.

(e) Counsel for the opposing party will then do likewise. (Alternatively, by
arrangement between counsel, leading counsel for the appellant may
introduce all counsel.)

(f) When addressing the judges at any stage, counsel must invariably use the
words “My Lord” or “My Ladyship” and must preface their submissions
with the expression “If your Lordship/Ladyship pleases” or “May it please
your Lordship/Ladyship”, as the case may be.

(g) When presenting your view of the law, you should say “I submit that ...,”
“In my respectful submission...,” or “I contend that”. Never say “I
think/feel that...”. If you do, you are likely to be told that the court is not
interested in what you think or feel. Similarly, you do not need to say ‘I
would like to submit...’; just say ‘I submit...’.

(h) When ending the argument, counsel should advise the court accordingly, in
these words, or words like effect: “If your Lordship pleases, that is the case
for the Appellant” or “Unless I can be of further assistance, these are my
submissions”.

(i) There is a right of reply (of five minutes) for leading counsel for the
appellant only. He or she may choose not to exercise the right. The purpose
of a right of reply is to rebut arguments raised by the third and fourth
counsel, and not merely to repeat the arguments of the first and second
counsel.

(j) In court, when the judges are about to leave, silence is called for and all
persons present rise. The judges may prefer to send counsel and spectators
out, rather than leaving the room themselves, while they consider their
decision.

5
 (k) As in other forms of debate, counsel refer to other counsel only in the third
person and in terms of respect. Thus, refer to other counsel as “My learned
friend, Mr. So-and-so” or “My learned leader” or “My learned junior”, as
the case may be.

(l) This mark of respect is also used when referring to other persons concerned
in the administration of the law: “the learned judge”, the “learned
magistrate”, “the learned author”, etc.

V. CITING AUTHORITIES, STATUTES, etc

You are expected to support your arguments by reference to decided cases, statutes,
textbooks and other authorities. This does not mean that you must cite an authority for
every proposition no matter how elementary. For example, no authority is needed for the
proposition that a simple contract is unenforceable unless supported by consideration.
Even a less elementary proposition than that may require no authority. Counsel are
expected to make a value judgment on this question.

Know the weight of your authorities

You must know the weight which the court you are theoretically addressing will place on
the authority you cite to it. Although not technically bound by the decisions of any court,
the court will pay carefully attention to ‘authoritative’ decisions and you must therefore
know the doctrine of precedent as it applies to the courts in Hong Kong, England and any
other countries, the judgments of whose courts you wish to cite in argument. Thus, if you
are citing a case decided by the Court of Exchequer Chamber, you will need to know the
place which that court occupied in the hierarchy of English courts and the weight which the
court you are addressing will place on the court’s decision.

The facts of cited cases

Another judgment has to be made in deciding whether or not to give the judge a summary
of the facts of a case which you are citing to him or her. Give the facts of the case you are
citing whenever you think they are important for an understanding of the proposition for
which you cite the case, or if they will strengthen, or make more persuasive, or provide a
compelling illustration of, the point which you are trying to make.

Make sure you know the facts of any case which you cite even though you do not intend to
quote them to the judge. This will ensure you can first answer any question on the facts
which the judge may put do you and, secondly, deal with any attempt by your opponent to
distinguish the cited case from the one being argued. In the latter event, you will need to be
familiar not only with the facts of both cases but also with the theory of distinguishing
cases and with such phrases as ratio decidendi and obiter dicta.

6
Know the systems of law reporting

Another important point is that you should be familiar with the systems of law reporting in
Hong Kong, England and other countries, the judgments of whose courts may be referred
to in argument. You must cite the most authoritative report, whenever possible [eg. Appeal
case (AC) in preference to The Weekly Law Reports (WLR) or All England Reports
(AllER)].

Know the correct methods of citation

It creates a very bad impression if you do not use the correct method of citing cases or
describing courts or referring to their decisions. Never verbally cite a case as “Brown v.
Jones”; “Brown and Jones” is correct, although “Brown against Jones” is sometimes used.
Similarly, in criminal cases, the case “R v. Jones” should be called “The Queen (or the
King) and Jones” and not “R. and Jones” or “Regina and Jones”.

If you cite a case, give the full reference to the law report where it can be found. Thus, you
should say “In Brown and Jones which is reported in 1965 volume 1 Queen’s Bench at
page 409, it was held that ...” Do not abbreviate “Queen’s Bench” to “Q.B.”.

Remember that it is correct to speak of the “speeches” of the Lords in a case decided by the
House of Lords but the “advice” of the Judicial Committee in a case heard by the Judicial
Committee of the Privy Council.

Quotations from judgments

When quoting from judgments, always read from the photocopy of the case and not from
your own notes or a text book and ensure the judges have their own copy before proceeding
to read. (It may be a good idea to pause and ensure the judges have found the correct page
in their bundles of authorities before proceeding with your oral submissions.) Further
suggestions in respect of the reading of quotations are given below under the heading
“Presentation”.

Textbooks and articles

Textbooks and articles in periodicals are not usually regarded as “authorities” (except that,
where there is no judicial authority, Halsbury’s Laws of England and a few other venerable
works may be treated as authority). Show that you are aware of this attitude by adopting a
formula such as:

“I submit that the law on this point is correctly stated in Salmond on

Contract 2nd Ed. at page 266”.

OR

“I wish to adopt the view of the law expressed by Professor Goodhart in his
article entitled “Mistake in the Law of Contract” which appears in 1967
New Law Journal at page 212.”

7
As with the citing of cases, it is important, when referring to the views of text writers or
contributors to legal periodicals, that you should use the correct method of describing the
book or periodical in which those views appear. Always inform the judge of the particular
edition of a textbook from which you are quoting. If the edition is in more than one volume,
give the particular volume number and also the page from which your quotation is taken.

Interpretation of statutes

In some cases there will be a statutory provision which applies to one or more of the issues.
The courts have developed certain rules of general interpretation, certain presumptions
applying to statutes of certain kinds, and maxims concerning the meaning of certain
familiar word arrangements. These assist them in the construction of statutory provisions.
The Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance also lays down some rules of
interpretation. In addition, the particular statute in question may provide its own special
definitions and presumptions. You will need to consider all these rules and provisions in
any case which involves a statutory provision. It is not only in case where there is an
obvious ambiguity in the statute or an obvious difficulty in applying it to a given situation
that counsel needs to consider the rules of interpretation. In some cases, for example, the
canons of construction will serve to place restricted meanings on words which could easily
be regarded as having no limitations at all.

Know the scheme and purpose of the ordinance

Even although you intend to quote only one section of an ordinance, always read the whole
ordinance because other sections may qualify or help to explain the particular section
which seems to you to be most important. Further, in order to deal with points raised by the
judge or your opponent, you will need to understand the general scheme and purpose of the
statute. If you are concerned with a piece of delegated legislation, such as statutory
regulations, you will need to read not only the regulations themselves, but also the
ordinance which has authorised them. Also remember that there are special rules applying
to statutory regulations, bylaws and other delegated legislation which do not apply to
statutes.

Know the correct manner of citation

Take care to give the correct title to the statute, including its year. When referring to
individual provisions of an ordinance do not mix up such descriptions as “section”,
“clause”, “paragraph”, “sub-section”, “sub-clause”, etc. With reference to a statute, the
correct terms in descending order of importance are:

(a) section
(b) sub-section
(c) paragraph
(d) sub-paragraph

Thus, section 33 (1)(a)(i) refers to “section 33, sub-section 1, paragraph (a), sub-paragraph
(i)”.

8
The word “clause” is not used in respect of the sections of an ordinance but is used for the
parts of a schedule to an ordinance. The parts of statutory regulations are termed
“sections” and parts of each individual regulation are called “subsections”.

Reference on correct manner of citation

Any doubts which you may have as to the correct mode of citation can be resolved by
consulting: Jill Cottrell, Legal Research and Writing in Hong Kong.

Ethical Considerations relating to the citing of authorities

You should always remember that as counsel you owe a duty to the court and are there to
assist the court in arriving at a correct decision both upon the facts and the law. While it is
your duty to argue strenuously for the interpretation most favourable to your client, you
must also remember your duty to the court and should not, for example, fail to refer to an
authority which is in point merely because it does not appear to favour your own argument.
You must always mention such authority but, if unfavourable, you should endeavour to
distinguish it from the case before the court or perhaps endeavour to show that it should be
overruled or not followed.

Unless you inform the judge that you are doing so, do not leave out passages when quoting
from a judgment, nor quote out of context or without regard to qualifications which appear
elsewhere in the judgment. It is often desirable to quote the whole paragraph although you
are relying on only a passage from it.

Referring to your skeleton arguments

You should provide page & line references to the authorities you cite from your skeleton
arguments. Do not expect the judge to simply guess what page you are on. Naturally the
page numbers of your skeleton must correspond to the ones you provided to the judges.

VI. PRESENTATION

Attitude to the court

Make sure you adopt a properly respectful attitude and manner of address. This does not
mean you should be servile. Counsel’s attitude should be one of “respectful intellectual
equality”. A sensible course is to assure that the judge probably knows more about the
general law than you do, but may not be as well aware as counsel of the implications of the
particular case.

Apply the principles of good public speaking

The principles of good public speaking apply to the presentation of oral argument in court.
Stand up straight: do not walk, or sway, about while arguing; keep your hands out of your
pockets; do not fiddle with papers. Do not do anything which will distract the attention of
the court from your argument. Look at the judges while you are making your submissions.

9
This is good manners as well as good persuasive technique. The importance of
maintaining eye contact is one of the reasons why you should avoid reading either your
submissions to the court or long quotations from judgements. It has been said that judges
are more likely to give their attention to someone who is speaking directly to them. Direct
speech, however halting, will tend to carry more emphasis than reading, however fluent.
Another reason for not reading your submissions from prepared notes is that it reduces
your flexibility. If you are dependent on reading directly from your notes, you will be less
able to deal with the court’s questions and more likely to lose the thread of your argument
if you are interrupted.

It is vital that you retain the judge’s attention and interest. Avoid a flat, monotonous
delivery. Use pauses, and changes of voice pitch, volume and rate of delivery in order to
maintain interest. Speak up, without shouting. A voice a little above ordinary
conversational level should generally be most suitable.

Your delivery should be at an ordinary pace but, if a judge is taking notes, be careful you
are allowing him to keep up with you: watch his pen. This is especially true in opening and
outlining your submissions: make yourself speak more slowly than normal, so that the
judge can write them down and you overcome any stage fright you may be feeling. When
you turn to a new submission tell the judge: ‘I turn now to my second submission as
outlined’, and pause for a moment.

Wordiness and complex structure cause boredom. Terse sentences maintain interest, and
serve better to convey the meaning. Choose your phrases carefully. Make them accurate,
succinct and compelling. Try to capture the merits of your case in one or two words. A
vivid phrase will help to keep your argument at the forefront of the judge’s mind, but avoid
extravagant or emotive language. Be forceful, but do not harangue the judge.

Opening Submissions

If you are counsel who speaks first, after introducing counsel, you should indicate the
general field of law with which the case is concerned and offer to summarize the facts, and
you may briefly outline the central focus of the argument. If you are counsel who speaks
first for the respondent, you should not give another summary of the facts unless there is
some substantial difference between your version and that of the first counsel. Normally
you would content yourself with drawing the court’s attention to any particular facts which
are especially important and which opposing counsel has not sufficiently drawn to the
court’s attention or which have not been put in proper perspective.
State the major issues

Having dealt with the facts, you should then inform the court of the major issues and your
attitude to them. Leading counsel should inform the court which issues will be dealt with
by leading counsel and which by junior counsel.

Inform the court of your proposed submissions

You should clearly identify the issue with which you intend to deal and the submissions
which you intend to make and the relationships between the various submissions. Such a

10
summary lets the judge see where you are going and ensures that at any stage he can readily
see the relevance of any observation you make and the conclusion to which you are
leading.

If you are leading counsel for the respondent, you should give a similar summary of the
issues as you see them in your opening. You should concentrate on making your own
positive submissions rather than spending too much time in rebuttal. Provided that you
have properly anticipated your opponents’ arguments, you are better advised to make your
rebuttal in the course of presenting your own submissions, rather than opening your
address with a furious onslaught on the points made for the appellant.

Time

Each counsel has 20 minutes for his submissions, with leading counsel for the
appellant/applicant allowed an additional 5 minute reply at the end of the moot. Make sure
you cover all the main topics, but if necessary adjust the order in which you deal with them
and the time which you spend on them. In preparing your arguments, leave time for
questions: as a rough measure, five minutes should be allocated for this and fifteen minutes
for argument. Sit down promptly when told your time has expired. The presiding judge
may be lenient and grant you extra time to draw your remarks to a close, but do not rely on
his doing so.

Do not be concerned if you finish before twenty minutes has expired; your succinctness
will be a point in your favour!

Questions from the judges

Generally, the judges will question you as you develop your argument. Questions should
be welcomed as they enable you to assess the trend of the judge’s thinking and to adjust
your presentation accordingly. Listen carefully to what the judge is saying and try to
identify the real point which is worrying the judge and address your argument to removing
his or her doubts. Do not be afraid to depart from your tentative plan if you see the chance
of meeting and overcoming a doubt which the judge appears to have. If you have mastered
the case, you will find that you can react to questions readily and even welcome them. If
the judge’s questions show he or she has not grasped your point, do not labour on through
you prepared submissions, but go back and elaborate on your point. Remember though,
you are trying to persuade the judge to a particular view of the law which supports your
clients case. Do not lose sight of this and become carried away with purely hypothetical
situations. Do not assume that every question is designed to refute your argument. This is
very common amongst beginning mooters. Sometimes the judge will ask a question which
is designed to help you develop your point, or simply because he didn’t hear what you said.
Think about the implications of the question before you answer and, if you do not
understand the judge’s point, do not be afraid to ask him (politely) to repeat it. Have a
yellow ‘Post-it’ (or something similar) you can place on your notes (if necessary) to help
you come back to where you were before the question.

You must treat the judge’s suggestions on the law with great respect but you are not
obliged to accept that they are correct. Couch your disagreement in properly respectful

11
language. For example, “I am obliged to your Lordship for drawing my attention to that
case but, with respect, I would submit that the present case is distinguishable on its facts
because ...”or “If I may respectfully differ from your Lordship...” (Similarly, do not be too
outspoken in your criticism of the decisions of other judges. You may “respectfully differ”
from a judge’s decision or point out that ‘it has been criticised’ by notable writer, or not
followed, but you should not describe it as “ludicrous”.)

While being careful not to become aggressive or offensive, do not readily give in to the
judge’s suggestions if they are harmful to your case. Take your time in answering. If you
cannot think of any effective reply, then you need not concede the point. It is enough if you
say “I am sorry, Mr Lord, but I can’t take this point any further”, or “My Lord, I cannot be
of further assistance. I have already made my submissions on this issue.”

Anticipate questions by considering the implications of your submissions: will your view
of the law lead to injustice in other cases? Will it have serious practical effects? Will it
‘open the floodgates’?

VII. CONCLUSION

It is hoped that the moots will provide experience in the preparation and presentation of an
argument according to the forms and procedure of the courts. Due allowance will be made
for the fact that you will not yet have studied procedure as a formal subject. Besides
listening to moots in which you are not involved, you should at least once in the year attend
the High Court or the District Court and follow the trial of an action, or preferably an
appeal argument, from beginning to end. Basically, your moot will be an argument of law
in which you should not hesitate to raise questions by which you may fairly advance your
client'’ case or damage that of your adversary. For these reasons, those of you who have
never done a moot would be well advised to watch a moot in progress before you appear
for the first time.

The judges will be requested:

(a) to ensure counsel do not exceed the time allotted.

(b) to see that the hearing is conducted fairly, in due form and as nearly as
possible as it would be in court.
(c) to comment on the argument as it develops and to question counsel when
necessary for clarification.
(d) after the conclusion of the argument, without necessarily delivering
judgment, to express any views they may have on the merits.
(e) to offer comments and practical hints to counsel on the preparation and
presentation of their cases.
(f) to assess the performance of each participant in the moot and to advise the
Mooting Committee of the standard achieved by each participant.

MJ/ck.0373
Revised December 2007

12
 APPENDIX A – EXAMPLE OF A SKELETON ARGUMENT

IN THE SUPREME MOOTING COURT

BETWEEN:
CECIL B SNAILS
Appellant
-and-

GINGER BEERS LTD

Respondent
_______________________________

SKELETON ARGUMENT
ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT
_______________________________

1. This is an appeal against the decision of Rogers J upholding the claim of the
Respondent (“Ginger Beers Ltd”) against the Appellant (“Cecil B Snails”) for damages
for negligence. The Appellant asks the court to allow the appeal on the basis that the
learned judge’s decision was wrong.

Ground of Appeal: Duty of Care

2. The relationship between a manufacturer and a consumer gives rise to a duty of care
where a manufacturer manufactured for human consumption an article which could not
be examined by the consumer: Donoghue v Stephenson [1932] AC 562.

(1) There was an assumption of responsibility by the Respondent to the Appellant by

manufacturing opaque bottles of ginger beers which the Appellant could not
examine.

(2) It was reasonably foreseeable that the Appellant would suffer an allergic reaction to
the traces of nuts contained in the beverage without being able to examine the bottle
prior to consumption.

Conclusion

3. It is accordingly submitted for the reasons set out above, the Court should allow the
appeal and find the Respondent owed a duty of care to the Appellant.

A Student
B Student

9 December 2006

13