Moot Court Competition as a Learning Experience: Maastricht Law Students Win VAR Moot Court Competition

Preparation

Once the team had been put together, it was time for preparation. ‘From the very beginning, we made the team aware that this was not a criminal law moot court. No, it is a modern administrative law procedure in which you look for a solution,’ says Sam. ‘We practiced that well during our practice sessions at the faculty and at the court in Roermond. Coach Bob had organised these sessions for the team.’ For about five months, the team came together and discussed, wrote, discussed even more and exchanged feedback in order to be as well prepared as possible. ‘We were very well supported throughout the entire preparation,’ says Ruben. ‘Not only Bob and Sam, but also Raymond Schlössels and Sander Jansen provided us with feedback and support at literally every moment of the week, even during the weekends.’ Bob adds: ‘If we get good input, we can give good feedback. That is our starting point. So it all depends on what the students provide.’

Competition procedure

During the competition, the team had to deal with two cases. The first case, which mainly involved written preparation, concerned a complex dispute between a municipality and a group of residents about the arrival of a shelter for status holders in a former hospital. ‘In the written round, you draft documents for one party, the claimant or the administrative body. Another university is the opposing party with whom you exchange documents. You only hear the defences during the first oral round and then you have to argue on the spot,’ Steven explains. ‘The finalists are determined based on the written documents and performances during the oral round.’

In the final, the team got to work on a completely new case. ‘We defended a citizen who had taken in dogs and cats after she had to close her animal shelter because the lease expired. After complaints from local residents, the mayor took quite a strong stance against that citizen. Basically a nuisance dispute,’ Ruben explains. ‘However, we soon managed to talk it into a case about animal welfare, a very smart idea of ​​Steven’s. After all, the woman wanted to take care of animals that would otherwise end up on the streets.’ The final ultimately ended in a settlement. ‘In both cases, we immediately took a step forward and showed flexibility,’ says Steven. ‘We wanted to go to the reasonable middle ground. And yeah, who can be against that?’ Coach Sam nods in agreement: ‘This competition is very close to practice, the judges who appear there also know that. If you show that you are against a settlement, that shows that you have not understood one side of the coin very well. Namely that a good settlement is better than a bad trial.’

Trust in teammates

Everyone worked hard on the written piece, but during the oral rounds there is only room for two spokespersons. ‘We deliberately chose to let one person speak. That is the smartest thing to do, because you start to dilute each other’s arguments or get in each other’s way of thinking if you have two people speaking,’ Ruben explains. Sam adds: ‘This method is also the closest to practice. You have a second who is super important. Ruben’s oral presentation during the final was fantastic, but Steven had a lot of valuable background knowledge and was able to write things down for Ruben in between.’

The team had exactly one hour to prepare the final case. ‘We were placed in a small room where we were closely monitored,’ says Isabel. ‘Our coaches stayed behind and we were not allowed to contact them.’ That was the moment for Sam and Bob to let go of the students, ‘but’, they both say, ‘it felt good’. Bob: ‘I really enjoyed seeing the mutual trust from the sidelines during the final. Where other teams contradicted themselves, our team had a clear message. We didn’t dare to hope for the win yet, but it was in the air.’ After months of preparation, the team was allowed to take the first prize back to Maastricht. ‘We are of course very proud of that, that cup, but I think we all had the same feeling of satisfaction. That we invested so much together to make it a success,’ says Isabel. ‘And you get a great experience in return. You get to know yourself, you find out what suits you and what doesn’t. I mean, if you want to become a lawyer later, you will at least have had the chance to experience what that is like. And that under very good guidance.’ Youri can confirm that: ‘By participating in the VAR Moot Court Competition, I went to my first visit to the administrative judge for my work with a sense of peace.’