“Advanced Rounds” means, with respect to any Tournament, all of the applicable Championship Rounds, Semifinal Rounds, Quarterfinal Rounds, Octafinal Rounds, and Run-Off Rounds conducted at that Tournament.

“Applicant” and “Respondent” means the Team (or the members of a Team) which argues on behalf the Applicant state and Respondent state, respectively, at any given point in the Competition.

“Bench Memorandum” means the memorandum of and laws and authorities concerning the Competition Problem prepared by the executive office for the exclusive use of Competition judges, as described in Rule 5.5.

“Competition” means the 2006 Philip C. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition.

“Competition Problem” means the official Compromis of the Competition as supplemented or corrected by any official Problem Clarifications or corrections.

“Executive Director” means the Executive Director of the International Law Students Association.

“International Tournament” means the Shearman & Sterling International Rounds, the final stage of the Competition, held among the Representatives from each nation.

“Memorial” means the written pleadings of each Team, written and submitted pursuant to these Rules.

“National Rules Supplement” means additional rules or clarifications applicable to the Teams from one nation, and must be approved by the Executive Director and made available to all Teams from that nation. (If a Team is unsure whether any National Rules Supplement is applicable to it, the Team should contact the Administrator or the Executive Director.) All Teams are advised to be aware that National Rules Supplements may exist for their Qualifying Tournament.

“Official Timetable” means the official timetable of the Competition.

“Oral Round” means a single match of oral presentation between two Teams, one representing Applicant and one representing Respondent, as described in Rule 7.0.

“Penalties” means Raw Points deducted for any Rule violation pursuant to Rule 11.0.

“Problem Clarifications” means the official clarifications of the Competition Problem and of these Rules, as published pursuant to Rule 2.7.

“Qualifying Tournament” means any Tournament by which a nation determines which Teams advance to the International Tournament.

“Representative,” "National Representative," and "Regional Representative" each mean a Team selected to represent each nation at the International Tournament, whether by Qualifying Tournaments or by other means.

“Rules” means these Official Rules of the Competition and any applicable National Rules Supplements.

“Team” means a team of eligible students recognized by the ILSA Executive Office which competes in the Competition, pursuant to Rule 2.0.

“Tournament” means a competitive level of the Competition.

OFFICIAL RULE 1.0 Organization of the Competition

1.1 Administration

The Competition is presented annually by the International Law Students Association (ILSA) and The American Society of International Law (ASIL). The Competition is administered by the Executive Director. The ILSA Executive Office is located at 25 East Jackson Boulevard, Suite 518, Chicago, IL, 60604, U.S.A., tel: +1 (312) 362-5025, fax: +1 (312) 362-5073, email: ilsa@ilsa.org.

All materials developed by ILSA for the Competition, including, without limitation, the Official Rules, the Competition Problem, and the Problem Clarifications, are the sole property of ILSA, and may not be reproduced for any purpose other than participation in or administration of the Competition without the express and prior written consent of the ILSA Executive Director. In addition, all Memorials become the sole property of ILSA, and may not be republished without its express consent.

1.2 Structure of Competition

(a) The Competition consists of two levels of competitions: (1) Qualifying Tournaments, and (2) the International Tournament. Qualifying Tournaments are held in each nation where more than one team wishes to participate in the Competition. The International Tournament represents the final stage of the Competition and includes the International Preliminary Rounds, Advanced Rounds, and the World Championship Jessup Cup Round. Each Tournament consists of written pleadings and oral pleadings.

(b) The Executive Director will determine the exact number of Teams participating in the International Tournament and manner in which they are chosen, provided that each participating nation is permitted to enter at least one (1) Team in the International Tournament of the Competition for every ten (10) Teams participating in that nation’s Qualifying Tournament(s). In nations in which only one Team registers, that Team is the National Representative.

1.3 Establishment of Qualifying Tournaments

If more than one Team registers from a particular nation or jurisdiction, the Executive Director will inform all such Teams of name and contact information of the Administrator of their Qualifying Tournament. The Team that wins the Qualifying Tournament is the National Representative to the International Tournament. If only one Team registers from a nation or jurisdiction, that Team is the National Representative to the International Tournament.

1.4 Administrators

The Executive Director will appoint an Administrator for each Qualifying Tournament. The Administrator will designate the date and location for the Qualifying Tournament and must conduct the Qualifying Tournament consistent with these Rules and in consultation with the Executive Director.

An Administrator may not serve as coach or in any other way assist a Team registered in his or her Qualifying Tournament. An Administrator may not act as a judge in actual or exhibition Rounds of his or her Qualifying Tournament.

1.5 Interpretation of Rules

The Executive Director shall serve as final arbiter of implementation and interpretation of these Rules and of any National Rules Supplement.

OFFICIAL RULE 2.0 Participation and Eligibility

2.1 Team Eligibility

(a) All law schools and international law‑related advanced degree programs are eligible to participate in the Competition upon formal acceptance by the Executive Director. Each school may enter one Team. In extenuating circumstances, an Administrator may petition the Executive Director, in writing, to allow multiple Teams from a single school. Such representation may be allowed if it is established that each Team fulfills the participation and registration requirements of these Rules and 1) a local competition would be difficult or impossible to hold due to school regulations, calendars or other circumstances beyond the control of the Administrator or Teams participating; or 2) the Teams represent different colleges or departments of the same school and will be participating independently of each other.

(b) Teams which have outstanding debts for fees or other Competition obligations (including the United States hosting obligation as described in the United States National Supplement) are not eligible to compete in the following year's Competition until such fees have been paid or obligations have been met.

(c) Any Team which utilizes an ineligible Team member (Official Rule 2.2), improper outside assistance (Official Rule 2.4), the Bench Memorandum (Official Rule 2.5), or an improper other Team's Memorial (Official Rule 2.6) will be disqualified from the Competition.

2.2 Team Composition and Selection

A Team is composed of two (2) to five (5) members. In order to be eligible, a student must satisfy the requirements of this Rule 2.2.

2.2.1 Minimum requirements for team member eligibility

A person may only be a member of a team if he or she is enrolled:

(a) as a student full-time or part-time in a program of study leading to the equivalent of a LLB or U.S. Juris Doctor degree; or

(b) in one or more courses at a law school or other institution which is participating in the Competition during the relevant academic year; or

2.2.2 Executive Director's written permission required in certain cases

In addition to satisfying Rule 2.2.1, a person must additionally obtain the written permission of the Executive Director to be a member of the team, if the person:

(a) is enrolled as an extern or apprentice under Rule 2.2.1(c); or

(b) is enrolled as a visiting student studying in a joint program between schools or on a special program at a school other than the person's primary school of enrollment; or

2.2.3 Persons ineligible to be team members

Regardless of Rules 2.2.1 and 2.2.2, a person shall not be a member of a team if that person:

(a) has been admitted to the bar or admitted to legal practice in any jurisdiction; or

(b) is enrolled as a student at more than one institution, other than as a visiting student under Rule 2.2.2(b); or

2.3 Team Selection Process

Team members may be chosen by any method approved by the responsible authority within the school, subject to the following provisions:

2.3.1 Selection by Intramural Competitions

If a school wishes to hold an intramural competition to determine the composition of its Team, the current Competition Problem may not be used. unless approved in writing by the Executive Director.

2.3.2 Nationality Requirements

Administrators may not, without the written approval of the Executive Director, set nationality requirements with regard to the composition of Teams. Requests for such approval must state clearly in writing, the reasons for such a requirement, and must be incorporated in approved National Rules Supplement, in accordance with these Rules.

2.4 Outside Assistance to Teams

All research, writing and editing must be solely the product of Team members. However, faculty members and other Team advisors may provide advice to a Team. Such advice must be limited to: general discussions of the issues; suggestions as to research sources; consultations regarding oral advocacy technique; the location of legal sources; general legal research methods; general commentary on argument organization and structure, the flow of arguments, and format; and advice during Competition elimination rounds as to pleading option or similar strategy. Any Team which receives inappropriate outside assistance will be disqualified from the Competition.

2.4.1 Basic Materials

The Executive Director may choose to distribute to all teams a set of basic research materials. These materials are intended to provide teams with an overview of public international law and with the subject material of the Competition Problem. These basic materials may include treaties, court decisions, scholarly articles, or other materials. Teams are permitted to use these materials in their research and to refer to them in their Memorials and oral pleadings, provided that, when used in Memorials, these materials must be cited to their original source consistent with Rule 6.5.

2.5 Confidentiality of the Bench Memorandum

The Bench Memorandum is strictly confidential. The Executive Director will disqualify any Team which makes use of the Bench Memorandum. Teams having a copy of the Bench Memorandum should immediately return it to the Executive Director without examining the contents.

2.6 Use of Opposing Team's Memorials and Arguments

A Team may not view or otherwise become privy to any Memorial other than the applicable Applicant or Respondent Memorials of each of its scheduled opponents. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Teams may incorporate arguments and other information from Memorials and oral arguments of other Teams which that Team has legally viewed.

2.7 Problem Clarifications

Teams may submit written requests for clarifications of the Competition Problem to the ILSA Executive Office by the date in the Official Timetable. Based upon the requests received from all Teams, the ILSA Executive Office will publish Problem Clarifications on the date in the Official Timetable. Each Team must ensure that it receives and adequately notes the Problem Clarifications in preparation for the Competition.

2.8 Anonymity of Teams

Teams must not reveal their school or country of origin to judges at any time during a Tournament. The Administrator may disqualify or impose a Penalty against any Team that intentionally or inadvertently discloses its school or country of origin to a judge, whether or not such disclosure occurs during an Oral Round.

OFFICIAL RULE 3.0 Team Registration

3.1 Team Registration Form and Team Contact

Each Team must complete a registration form and remit the appropriate registration fee by the registration deadline in the Official Timetable. Each Team must designate a Team contact. Notice to the Team contact constitutes notice to all Team members.

Teams unable to pay the registration fee may request a waiver from the Executive Director. The Executive Director will grant waivers in exceptional circumstances only.

3.2 Team Members Registration

Each Team must submit all Team members' names and the degree program in which each Team member is enrolled to the ILSA Executive Office by the deadline in the Official Timetable..

3.3 Team Number as Identification

After the registration deadline in the Official Timetable, the Executive Director will assign each Team a team number.

OFFICIAL RULE 4.0 [Reserved]

OFFICIAL RULE 5.0 Judges

5.1 Eligiblity of Persons to Judge

The Executive Director, or the Administrator in consultation with the Executive Director, will determine persons who are eligible to serve as judges in any Tournament, subject to the following provisions.

5.1.1 Students

Students may not act as judges, except LL.M. and other post‑graduate degree candidates who are not directly affiliated with any Team participating in the Tournament at which they are judging.

5.1.2 Faculty Advisors and Coaches

Team faculty advisors or coaches, or other persons directly affiliated with a Team, may not act as judges in any Tournament until the Team has been eliminated from the Competition.

5.2 Anonymity of Teams

Judges should not attempt to ascertain the school or country of origin of any Team during a Tournament. However, in circumstances where the judge believes his or her evaluation of a particular Memorial would be affected by knowledge of whether or not the native language of the Team is English, the judge may request the Executive Director to reveal whether English is the native language of the Team.

5.3 Judges Affiliated With Schools in the Competition

No judge should sit on a panel of any Oral Round involving a Team from a school with which the judge has an affiliation, acquaintance or other role which would create an appearance of impropriety, except in situations disclosed to and approved by the Executive Director. Merely being an alumnus of a host school does not constitute a violation.

Judges should disqualify themselves from judging a Team if they have a personal or professional relationship with the school or someone affiliated with that Team, and if that relationship might jeopardize their impartiality or create an appearance of impropriety. However, judges should not disqualify themselves from judging a round merely because they have an acquaintance with a Team member or other affiliation or relationship with the school.

If a Team competing in an Oral Round wishes to inform the Administrator that a judge assigned to that Oral Round might be disqualified under this Rule 5.3, it must inform the bailiff prior to the beginning of that Oral Round. The fact that a Team member recognizes a judge is not itself sufficient to disqualify the judge.

5.4 Prior Viewing of Teams

(a) Subject to Section 5.4(b), judges should not view a Team which they have viewed in a previous Oral Round. If a judge must view a Team twice, the Administrator should strive to ensure that the judge views the Team’s opposite side.

(b) In the Advanced Rounds of the International Tournament, the Executive Director may permit judges to view one or more Teams which they have previously judged, if such viewing serves the best interests of the Competition.

5.5 Bench Memorandum

Judges must keep the contents of the Bench Memorandum strictly confidential from Teams.

5.6 Commentary by Judges

Judges are encouraged to provide direct feedback to Teams regarding the Teams' performance at the completion of an Oral Round. In providing such feedback, judges are admonished to give due regard to the time limitations and schedule of the Tournament. With the exception of the Advanced Rounds of any Tournament, judges must not reveal to any Team the results of their individual determinations or the Team’s Raw Scores, nor may they provide any substantive feedback that would reveal their individual determinations or contents of the Bench Memorandum.

OFFICIAL RULE 6.0 Memorials

6.1 Submission of Memorials

Each Team participating in the Competition must prepare an Applicant and a Respondent Memorial. Unless otherwise specified in an applicable National Supplement, the Team must send via electronic mail one copy of each Memorial to the Administrator and to the Executive Director no later than 11:59 p.m., university's local time, on the date specified in the Official Timetable. Each Memorial should be contained in a single file. The electronic copies must be submitted in Microsoft Word for Windows format.

If a team is unable to send its Memorials by electronic mail, or is unable to submit its Memorials in Microsoft Word for Windows format, it must notify the Executive Director as soon as possible (and before the deadline for mailing the Memorials), and the Executive Director may impose different requirements for the delivery of that Team’s Memorials. All electronic and paper copy versions (if any) submitted to the Executive Director, the Administrator, or any other person under the Rules must be identical. Equipment failure or problems will not be considered an excuse for improper formatting or late mailing of Memorials. Once submitted to the Executive Director, Memorials may not be altered.

6.1.1 Memorials Submitted in Languages Other Than English

If permitted by applicable National Rules Supplements, Teams may submit Memorials for Qualifying Tournaments in languages other than English. Teams must send such Memorials to the Executive Director in the original language via electronic mail on or before the deadline indicated in the Official Timetable. Memorials of such Teams advancing to the International Tournament must be translated to English, and must otherwise conform to the required format outlined in these Rules, prior to submission to the International Tournament. The Executive Director will contact any such Team advancing to the International Tournament, modifying the deadline for submission of the English translations of its Memorials.

The translation of Memorials must be, to the greatest extent possible, verbatim translations of the Memorials submitted in connection with the Qualifying Tournament. The contents of Memorials may not be revised, updated or otherwise altered in the translation process. The Executive Director may disqualify any Team that alters the legal content of its Memorial(s) during translation.

6.2 Format of Memorials

The font and size of the text of all parts of the Memorial, including the footnotes, must be the same and must be in either Times New Roman 12-point or Courier 10-point, or larger type. The text of all parts of each Memorial must be double-spaced, except that the text of footnotes and headings may be single-spaced, but there must be double-spacing between separate footnotes, and between each heading and the body-text of the Memorial. Quotations to sources outside of the Memorial of 50 words or more in any part of the Memorial must be block quoted (i.e. right and left indented) and may be single-spaced.

The font-size and double-spacing provisions of this Rule do not apply to the cover page of the Memorial. The double-spacing provisions of this Rule does not apply to the Index of Authorities or the Table of Contents.

6.3 Description of the Memorial

6.3.1 Parts of the Memorial

The Memorial must contain the following parts, and only the following parts:

Cover Page;

Table of Contents;

Index of Authorities;

Statement of Jurisdiction;

Questions Presented;

Statement of Facts;

Summary of Pleadings;

Pleadings; and

Conclusion and/or Prayer for Relief.

6.3.2 Legal Argument Limited to Pleadings Section

Substantive, affirmative legal argument or legal interpretation of the facts of the Competition Problem may only be presented in the “Pleadings” section of the Memorial, including the Conclusion and/or Prayer for Relief (except insofar as such argument may be summarized in the “Summary of Pleadings” or anticipated in the “Questions Presented”).

6.3.3 Index of Authorities

Each Memorial must include an “Index of Authorities.” The Index must contain a list of all legal authorities cited in any section of the Memorial. The Index must include a description of each authority adequate to allow a reasonable reader to identify and locate the authority in a publication of general circulation, and must include the page number(s) of the Memorial on which each authority is cited.

6.3.4 Statement of the Facts

Teams are advised that judges will take the following into account in evaluating the Statement of Facts. A well-formed Statement of the Facts should be limited to the stipulated facts and necessary inferences from the Compromis and any clarifications to the Compromis. The Statement of the Facts should not include unsupported facts, distortions of stated facts, argumentative statements, or legal conclusions. The Compromis typically omits certain facts which might be relevant or dispositive to the outcome of the case. Participants will be judged on their ability to conform the facts to their arguments without creating new facts or drawing unreasonable inferences from the Competition Problem.

6.3.5 Summary of the Pleadings

A well-formed Summary of the Pleadings should consist of a substantive summary of the “Pleadings” section of the Memorial, rather than a simple reproduction of the headings contained in the Pleadings section.

6.4 Length

(a) The Pleadings section of each Memorial, including any footnotes or endnotes and the Conclusion and/or Prayer for Relief, must be no longer than 9,500 words.

(b) The Summary of Pleadings section of each Memorial must be no longer than 700 words.

6.5 Limitations on the Use of Footnotes/Endnotes

Either footnotes or endnotes may be used. However, footnotes or endnotes are to be used only to identify the source of a statement made in the body of the Memorial and to provide the reader with a citation to a generally-available reference for that source. Neither footnotes nor endnotes may include substantive pleadings, examples, or any text other than the actual cite. Footnotes and endnotes are included in the word count of Rule 6.4.

Inclusion of text other than the actual cite in a footnote is a violation of Rule 6.3.2. Gross and repeated failure to include adequate information in footnotes is, in the sole discretion of the Administrator, a discretionary Penalty, subject to a Penalty of up to five (5) points.

Illustrative example of an acceptable footnote: Certain Norwegian Loans (Fr. v. Nor.), 1957 I.C.J. 9, 23-24 (July 6) [hereinafter Norwegian Loans].

Illustrative example of a footnote in violation of the Official Rules: Certain Norwegian Loans (Fr. v. Nor.), 1957 I.C.J. 9, 23-24 (July 6) [hereinafter Norwegian Loans] (holding that France’s reservation in its declaration denying the Court jurisdiction over issues essentially within the national jurisdiction as understood by France could be utilized reciprocally by Norway).

6.6 Covers

6.6.1 Information Contained on Memorial Cover

Each Memorial should bear on its cover the following, and only the following: (a) the team number; (b) the name of the court (the International Court of Justice); (c) the year of the competition; (d) the name of the case; and (e) the title of the document (i.e., "Memorial for Respondent" or "Memorial for Applicant").

6.6.2 Team Number as Identification on Memorial Cover

The team number must be placed in the upper right‑hand corner of the outside front cover of the each Memorial, followed by an "A" for the Applicant Memorial and an "R" for the Respondent Memorial (For example, for team number 000, the identification of 000 A or 000 R would appear at the upper right hand corner of the outside front cover of the Applicant or Respondent Memorials respectively.).

6.7 Anonymity in Memorials

Names of participants, nations or schools may not appear on or within the Memorials. Signature pages are prohibited. The Administrators shall strike all references to Team member or school names from Memorials before submitting them to judges.

OFFICIAL RULE 7.0 Oral Pleading Procedures

7.1 General Procedures

Each Oral Round of each Tournament consists of ninety (90) minutes of oral pleadings. Applicant and Respondent are each allotted forty‑five (45) minutes. Two (2) members, and no more than two (2) members, from each Team shall make oral presentations during the round. Prior to the beginning of the Oral Round, each Team must indicate to the bailiff how it wishes to allocate its 45 minutes among (a) its first oralist, (b) its second oralist, and (c) rebuttal (for Applicant) or surrebuttal (for Respondent). The Team may not allocate more than twenty-five (25) minutes, including rebuttal or surrebuttal, to either oralist. Time allocated for but not used by one oralist may not be used by another oralist, or in the rebuttal or surrebuttal. Any Team member may act as an oralist during any round of the Competition. In extenuating circumstances, the Executive Director has discretion to permit a single oralist to argue beyond the twenty‑five (25) minute limit. Teams using interpreters shall be allotted additional time pursuant to Rule 7.8.

7.1.1 Extension of Time at Judges' Discretion

Judges may, at their discretion, extend total Team oral argument time beyond the forty‑five (45) minute allocation, up to an additional ten (10) minutes per Team. Oralists asked to further expand upon arguments may, in this instance, appear for more than the twenty‑five (25) minute individual limit. Judges are strongly admonished to allow each Team a similar amount of time for oral argument, consistent with these Rules.

7.2 Three Judge Panels

In each Oral Round, the Administrator shall employ three (3) judges whenever possible. The Administrator may employ more than three (3) judges in Advanced Rounds. In extenuating circumstances, the Administrator may authorize panels of two (2) judges, but this should be done only as a last resort. In no case should an Administrator authorize a panel of one (1) judge.

7.3 Pleadings

The order of the pleadings in each Round at all levels of the Competition is:

Applicant 1 ‑‑> Applicant 2 ‑‑> Respondent 1 ‑‑> Respondent 2 ‑‑> Rebuttal (Applicant 1 or 2) ‑‑> Surrebuttal (Respondent 1 or 2).

7.3.1 Rebuttal and Surrebuttal

Each Team may reserve up to ten (10) minutes for rebuttal or surrebuttal. As a courtesy to the judges, Teams should announce whether they intend to reserve time for rebuttal or surrebuttal at the beginning of their oral argument, and how much time they intend to reserve. Failure to announce will not waive the right to rebuttal or surrebuttal. Only one Team member may deliver the rebuttal or surrebuttal. The Team need not indicate prior to rebuttal or surrebuttal which of its two eligible Team members will deliver rebuttal or surrebuttal.

7.3.2 Scope of Pleadings

A Team’s oral pleadings are not in any way limited to the scope of the Team’s Memorial. The scope of the Applicant's rebuttal is limited to responding to the Respondent's primary oral pleadings, and the scope of the Respondent's surrebuttal is limited to responding to the Applicant's rebuttal. If the Applicant waives rebuttal, Respondent may not appear for surrebuttal. Although judges are admonished to enforce the limits on the scope of rebuttal and surrebuttal, and may take a violation of this Rule into account in evaluating an oralist’s performance, there is no discretionary or non-discretionary Penalty for exceeding scope of rebuttal or surebuttal.

7.4 Ex Parte Procedure

In extreme circumstances, such as when a Team fails to appear for a scheduled Oral Round, the Administrator, after waiting thirty (30) minutes, may allow the Oral Round to proceed ex parte. In an ex parte proceeding, the attending Team presents its oral pleading, which is scored by the judges to the extent possible as if the absent Team had been present and arguing. In such a case, the Team that fails to appear for the scheduled Round forfeits all six (6) of the Round's Oral Round Points.

The Administrator may schedule an additional ex parte proceeding for the absent Team later in the Tournament, if time and administrative concerns permit. The scores from the absent Team’s ex parte proceeding does not affect the scoring of the original Oral Round and are used only for purposes of calculating individual oral pleading scores.

7.5 Of Counsel

During each Oral Round, one (1) additional Team member may sit at the counsel table with the two (2) oralists as counsel. The person acting as counsel must be one of the Team members registered pursuant to Rule 3.2. The person acting as counsel need not be the same person in each Oral Round.

7.6 Competition Communications

Only oral communications described in this Rule 7.6 are permitted. In particular, no written communication or exhibits may be delivered by any Team member to any judge.

7.6.1 Oral Courtroom Communication between Counsel and Judges

Each oralist may communicate with the judges, and the judges may communicate with that oralist, during the oralist’s allotted time. In addition, in extraordinary circumstances, the judges may communicate directly with either Team’s counsel table (for example, to clarify the spelling of an oralist’s name or to request that a Team remain quiet during its opponent’s oral presentation).

7.6.2 Oral Courtroom Communication and Activity at Counsel Table

Communication at the counsel table shall be in writing to prevent disruption, and Teams shall avoid all unnecessary noise, outbursts, or other inappropriate behavior which distracts from the argument in progress.

7.6.3 Written Courtroom Communication

Written communication during the Oral Round shall be limited to written communication among Team members seated at the counsel table. No other written communication may take place among the oralist, Team members seated at counsel table, spectators or Team members not present at the counsel table.

7.7 Spectators

All Preliminary Rounds should be open to the public. Teams may agree in advance, and after consultation with the Administrator, to limit the number of spectators in a room during Preliminary Rounds. Presence of coaches, advisors, or other spectators affiliated with the Team are permitted in the courtroom during an Oral Round involving the Team

7.7.1 Scouting

Team members or persons directly affiliated with any Team may only attend Preliminary Rounds in which their Team is competing. The Executive Director may in the interests of the Competition waive this Rule. Violation of this Rule should be brought to the attention of the Administrator immediately, without disturbing the Oral Round, or immediately after the Oral Round has finished.

There are two types of scouting, both of which are prohibited. “Direct Scouting” occurs when a Team attends an Oral Round involving one or more Teams against which it will compete in a future Oral Round. “Indirect Scouting” occurs when a Team attends an Oral Round involving two Teams against which it is not scheduled to compete in the Preliminary Rounds.

A Team which commits Direct Scouting forfeits all six Oral Round Points in the Preliminary Round (or Rounds) in which it competes against the Team (or Teams) which it scouted.

A Team which commits Indirect Scouting shall forfeit one Preliminary Round. For example, if the Team won four Preliminary Rounds, its total number of wins shall be reduced to three, without other adjustment to its Total Raw Points or Total Round Points. (If a Team which commits Indirect Scouting wins no Preliminary Rounds, there shall be no such adjustment.) This adjustment shall occur prior to the determination of final Preliminary Round rankings described in Rule 10.4.

7.8 Interpreters and the Use of Interpreters

7.8.1 Qualifying Tournaments

Each Administrator may allow Teams and/or judges to use languages other than English during Oral Rounds in a Qualifying Tournament, and/or may provide procedures whereby interpreters may be used, by including Rules to this effect in the National Rules Supplements

7.8.2 International Tournament

A Team wishing to present its oral pleadings in the International Tournament in a language other than English must arrange for interpreters to interpret its oral pleadings during the International Tournament. Arrangements for and costs incurred in hiring interpreters and equipment are the responsibility of the Team. A Team wishing to use interpreters must inform the Executive Director no later than two (2) weeks prior to the start of the International Preliminary Rounds.

Such Teams may request permission from the Executive Director to extend total Team oral argument time beyond the forty‑five (45) minutes allotted under Rule 7.1. The maximum extension of time will be twenty (20) minutes per Oral Round. The use of an interpreter in one Oral Round does not commit the Team to using an interpreter in every Oral Round.

Given that interpreters will be translating all arguments in a given Oral Round, any extension of time granted to a Team will also be granted to its opponents. All judges and oralists in an Oral Round involving an interpreter should take the professional needs of the translator (for example, the need for clear enunciation of speech) into account during the Oral Round.

7.8.3 Team Members as Interpreters

A member of a Team may serve as an interpreter for other members of the Team if: (a) he or she does not act as an oralist in the same Oral Round in which he or she is an interpreter; and (b) he or she does not sit at the counsel table during the Oral Round in which he or she is an interpreter; and (c) he or she does not communicate with his or her Team in any way during the Oral Round, except to interpret the oral pleadings.

7.8.4 Non‑Embellishment by Interpreters

When a Team employs an interpreter, the interpreter may only engage in a literal interpretation of the oralists' pleadings and the judges’ responses. No embellishment on the part of the interpreter to enhance or clarify the oralists' arguments or the judges’ responses is allowed. A Team which violates this Rule is subject to forfeit all six (6) of the Oral Round Points for that Oral Round.

7.9 Audio and Videotaping

No audio or videotaping of oral pleadings is permitted without the advance permission of the entire panel of judges, the two (2) participating Teams and either: 1) the Administrator; or 2) the Executive Director. In no circumstances are participating Teams permitted to view or listen to any such audio tape until after the completion of the Tournament in which the taped Oral Round occurs. ILSA reserves all rights to the audio and videotaping, or any other form of aural or visual reproduction, of any Oral Round or part thereof. All Teams participating in the World Championship Jessup Cup Round will be deemed to have consented to taping and broadcasting of that Oral Round.

7.10 Anonymity of Teams in Courtrooms

During an Oral Round, participants may not indicate their country or school of origin. Participants must not expose their school or country of origin through direct or indirect means, including statements to judges, name tags or other signifiers, the placement of folders, files, library books or other materials bearing the name or logo of the school on the counsel table, and the wearing of pins or clothing revealing the identity of their country or school.

7.11 Computers and Laptops in Courtrooms

During an Oral Round, oralists at the podium and participants seated at counsel table may not operate laptop, handheld or desktop computers or computing devices for any purpose. A Team whose member violates this Rule forfeits all six (6) Oral Round Points.

OFFICIAL RULE 8.0 Qualifying Tournament Pairing Procedures

8.1 Preliminary Rounds

Each Team participating in a Qualifying Tournament shall participate in Preliminary Rounds consisting of four (4) Oral Rounds, twice as Applicant and twice as Respondent; however, if four (4) or fewer Teams are participating in such Qualifying Tournament, the Executive Director may permit fewer rounds.

Each Team shall, to the degree possible, face any opposing Team only once in the Preliminary Rounds of a Qualifying Tournament. In the event that Teams must face each other in two (2) Preliminary Rounds, each Team shall plead as Applicant in one Round and Respondent in the other Round.

8.1.1 Pairings

The pairing of Teams for Preliminary Rounds shall be done, in the first instance, by a random draw. The Administrator may modify the pairings to account for absent Teams or other contingencies. If Teams must be newly paired, they must be provided their new opponents' Memorials as soon as reasonably possible, but in no event less than fifteen (15) minutes prior to the start of the newly paired round.

8.1.2 Sudden Death Rounds

If only two (2) Teams are competing in a Qualifying Tournament, the Executive Director may allow the conduct of the Qualifying Tournament by “Sudden Death Elimination Rounds.” In such Rounds, each Team argues only once as Applicant and once as Respondent (for a total of two rounds) to determine the winning Team. In Sudden Death Rounds, the Competition scoring system shall be adapted accordingly by the Administrator, in consultation with the Executive Director.

8.2 Quarterfinal Rounds

If more than sixteen (16) Teams are participating in a Qualifying Tournament, the Administrator may hold Quarterfinal Rounds consisting of four (4) matches among the eight (8) highest‑ranking Teams from the Preliminary Rounds. In such Quarterfinal Rounds, the pairings shall be as follows: the eighth-ranked Team versus the first-ranked Team (“Match One”); the seventh-ranked Team versus the second-ranked Team (“Match Two”); the sixth-ranked Team versus the third-ranked Team (“Match Three”); and the fifth-ranked Team versus the fourth-ranked Team (“Match Four”).

8.3 Semifinal Rounds

In Qualifying Tournaments of sixteen (16) or more Teams, the winning Team in each of the four Quarterfinal Rounds shall advance to the Semifinal Rounds. In such Semifinal Rounds, the pairings shall be as follows, with reference to the match numbers described in Rule 8.2: the winner of Match One versus the winner of Match Four; and the winner of Match Two versus the winner of Match Three.

In other Qualifying Tournaments of eight (8) or more Teams, the Administrator may hold Semifinal Rounds among the four (4) highest‑ranking Teams from the Preliminary Rounds. In such Semifinal Rounds, the pairings shall be as follows: the fourth-ranked Team versus the first-ranked Team; and the second-ranked Team versus the third-ranked Team.

8.4 Championship Rounds

If Semifinal Rounds have been held, the winning Team in each of the two Semifinal Rounds shall advance to the Championship Round. If Semifinal Rounds have not been held, then the top two teams from the Preliminary Rounds shall compete against one another in a single Championship Round. In either case, the winner of the Championship Round is the National Representative.

8.5 Pleading option

Before each Advanced Round, each competing Team will be given its completed master Team scoresheet from the Preliminary Rounds, but not individual judges' scoresheets or notes.

In the Quarterfinal and Semifinal Rounds, the higher-ranking Team from the Preliminary Rounds shall have the right to choose which side it will argue (this right is called the “pleading option”).

The pleading option for a Championship Round shall be determined by a coin toss. The higher-ranking Team from the Preliminary Rounds calls the toss. The Team that wins the toss has twenty (20) minutes to select which side it wishes to plead. If that Team fails to select, then the opposing Team has ten (10) minutes to select a side. If this opposing Team then fails to exercise its pleading option within a ten (10) minute period, it also shall forfeit its pleading option. Should both Teams fail to select, then the higher-ranked Team will argue Applicant and the lower-ranked Team will argue Respondent.

Once the sides have been selected, the Administrator will immediately notify both Teams. The Administrator will give to both Teams the appropriate Memorial of their opponent. The Teams will then be granted a reasonable time to prepare for the Oral Round.

OFFICIAL RULE 9.0 International Pairing Procedures

9.1 Representation

All National Representatives and all other Teams approved for that purpose by the Executive Director are eligible to compete in the International Tournament.

9.2 Preliminary Rounds

The Preliminary Rounds of the International Tournament consist of four (4) Oral Rounds. Each Team pleads twice as Applicant and twice as Respondent.

9.2.1 Pairings for the Preliminary Rounds

The Executive Director shall establish the pairings for the Preliminary Rounds , in the first instance, by a random draw. The Executive Director may modify this random draw to ensure geographic and competitive diversity and balance.

Pairings for the International Tournament and the Memorials of opposing Teams will be distributed to Teams on the first day of the International Tournament.

The Executive Director may subsequently modify the pairings to account for absent Teams. In such case, the Executive Director will notify affected Teams and deliver their opponents' Memorials as soon as possible.

9.2.2 Religious Scheduling Conflicts

No later than four (4) weeks prior to the Preliminary Rounds, Teams must notify the Executive Director in writing of any potential schedule conflicts owing to religious observances. The Executive Director will make every effort to accommodate the religious observances of Teams.

9.3 International Run-off, Octafinal and Quarterfinal Rounds

The Advanced Rounds of the International Tournament consist of the International Run-Off Rounds, the International Octafinal Rounds, the International Quarterfinal Rounds, the International Semifinal Rounds, and the World Championship Jessup Cup Round. Subject to Rule 9.3.4, the twenty-four (24) highest-ranked Teams from the Preliminary Rounds shall participate in the Advanced Rounds.

9.3.1 International Run-Off Rounds

The Run-Off Rounds consist of eight (8) pairings of the sixteen (16) Teams ranked ninth (9^th) through twenty-fourth (24^th) from the Preliminary Rounds, subject to Rule 9.3.4.

9.3.2 International Octafinal Rounds

The International Octafinal Rounds consist of eight (8) pairings of the eight (8) Teams ranked first (1^st) through eighth (8^th) from the Preliminary Rounds (subject to Rule 9.3.4), and the eight (8) Teams that win a match in the International Run-Off Rounds.

9.3.3 International Quarterfinal Rounds, Semifinal Rounds, and World Championship Jessup Cup Round

The International Quarterfinal Rounds consist of four (4) pairings of each of the eight (8) Teams that win a match in the International Octafinal Rounds. The International Semifinal Rounds consist of two (2) pairings of each of the four (4) Teams that win a match in the International Quarterfinal Rounds. The two (2) winning Teams from the International Semifinal Rounds advance to the World Championship Jessup Cup Round.

9.3.4 National Representation Limitation

No more than six (6) Teams from one nation may advance to the Advanced Rounds of the International Tournament. If more than six (6) Teams from one nation place among the twenty-four (24) highest-ranked Teams from the Preliminary Rounds, only the six highest-ranked Teams from such nation may advance to the Advanced Rounds. If after the application of this rule, there are fewer than twenty-four (24) Teams eligible for the Advanced Rounds, the highest-ranked Team(s) that did not otherwise qualify for the Advanced Rounds shall be added until the number of Teams equals twenty-four. This subsequent addition shall also be subject to this Rule 9.3.4.

Illustrative example: If seven Teams from the nation of Erewhon qualify for the International Run-Off Rounds, the seventh-ranked Team from Erewhon shall not advance to the Advanced Rounds. The twenty-fifth (25th) ranked Team from the Preliminary Rounds shall be added to the Advanced Rounds, unless the 25th-ranked Team is also from Erewhon; in such a case, the next-highest-ranked Team that is not disqualified by this rule would advance.

9.3.5 Pairings for the International Advanced Rounds

9.3.5.1 General Pairing Rule – Power-Seeding

The pairings in the International Run-Off, Octafinal, Quarterfinal, and Semifinal Rounds shall be determined by use of "power-seeding," i.e. the highest-ranked Team shall compete against the lowest-ranked Team, the second-highest-ranked Team shall compete against the second-lowest-ranked Team, etc. For purposes of this Rule, all rankings shall be determined by the final standings of the Preliminary Rounds.

Illustrative example: Under this rule, and unless one of the qualifications in this Rule applies, the pairings in the International Run-Off Rounds would be as follows: 9 vs. 24, 10 vs. 23, 11 vs. 22, 12 vs. 21; 13 vs. 20; 14 vs. 19; 15 vs. 18; 16 vs. 17.

9.3.5.2 Previous Meeting Qualification

If application of the General Pairing Rule would result in one or more pairings in which a Team would face an opponent that it faced in the International Preliminary Rounds, the Executive Director must adjust the pairings in an equitable manner in order that such pairing is avoided. If the Executive Director determines that, with respect to a given pairing, no adjustment is possible, the Executive Director may disregard this qualification with respect to such pairing.

9.3.5.3 National Pair‑off Qualification

(a) If two (2) Teams from a given nation advance to the Run-Off, Octafinal or Quarterfinal Rounds, those two Teams shall be paired against one another in such Round. All Teams not affected by this qualification shall then be paired according to the General Pairing Rule, discounting those two Teams.

(b) If three (3) Teams from a given nation advance to the Run-Off or Octafinal Rounds, the second-ranked Team from such nation shall be paired against the third-ranked Team from such nation. All Teams not affected by this qualification shall then be paired according to the General Pairing Rule, discounting those two Teams.

(c) If four (4) Teams from a given nation advance to the Run-Off or Octafinal Rounds, the first-ranked Team from such nation shall be paired against the fourth-ranked Team from such nation, and the second-ranked Team from such nation shall be paired against the third-ranked Team from such nation. All Teams not affected by this qualification shall then be paired according to the General Pairing Rule.

(d) If five (5) Teams from a given nation qualify for the Advanced Rounds, and if more than three (3) Teams from that nation place in the top eight (8) Teams from the Preliminary Rounds, then the fourth-and fifth-ranked Teams from such nation shall be paired against one another in the Run-Off Rounds. The place(s) in the Octafinal Rounds left vacant by the removal of the Team(s) to the Run-Off Rounds shall be occupied by the highest-ranked Team(s) from other nations, who shall not be required to compete in the Run-Off Rounds.

(e) If six (6) Teams from a given nation qualify for the Advanced Rounds, and more than two (2) Teams from that nation place in the top eight (8) Teams from the Preliminary Rounds, then the third- and sixth-ranked Teams from such nation shall be paired against one another in the Run-Off Rounds, and the fourth- and fifth-ranked Teams from such nation shall be paired against one another in the Run-Off Rounds. The place(s) in the Octafinal Rounds left vacant by the removal of between the Team(s) to the Run-Off Rounds shall be occupied by the highest-ranked Team(s) from other nations, who shall not be required to compete in the Run-Off Rounds.

9.4 Pleading Option in the International Tournament

Prior to each of the International Advanced Rounds, the Executive Director will give each competing Team a copy of its completed Team master scoresheet. For each pairing, the Executive Director will toss a coin, and the higher-ranked Team in that pairing will call the toss. The Team winning the toss must select which side it will argue within twenty (20) minutes. If that Team fails to make a selection, the other Team must select which side it will argue within (10) minutes If that Team fails to make a selection, then the higher-ranked Team will argue Applicant and the lower-ranked Team shall argue Respondent.

The Executive Director will then notify each Team which side it will be arguing and will deliver to each Team one copy of its opponent's Memorial. Both Teams shall then have a reasonable amount of time to prepare for the Oral Round.

OFFICIAL RULE 10.0 Competition Scoring

10.1 Preliminary Rounds

Scoring of the Preliminary Rounds shall consist of two parts: the scoring of the written Memorials, and the scoring of the Oral Rounds.

Each Team Memorial shall be submitted to three (3) Memorial judges. Each judge will score each Memorial on a scale of fifty (50) to one hundred (100) points.

Each Oral Round will be scored by a panel of three (3) judges. Each judge will score each oralist on a scale of fifty (50) to one hundred (100) points.

10.2 Calculation of Scoring Points

Two (2) categories of points shall be awarded to Teams in each match: Raw Score and Round Points.

10.2.1 Raw Scores

The calculation of Raw Scores shall be subject to the deduction of Penalty Points under the provisions of Rule 11.0.

10.2.1.1 Memorial Raw Scores

In each match, the Total Memorial Raw Score for each Team is the sum of the three (3) Memorial judges' scores for the side the Team argued in that Oral Round.

A Team's Total Competition Memorial Raw Score is the sum of the six (6) scores for its Applicant and Respondent Memorials. This score shall be used to determine Best Memorial Awards.

10.2.1.2 Oral Raw Scores

In each match, a Team's Total Oral Raw Score is the sum of the scores of the three (3) judges for each of its two oralists.

10.2.1.3 Total Raw Scores

In each match, a Team's Total Raw Score is the sum of the Team’s Total Memorial Raw Scores for that match and the Team’s Total Oral Raw Score for that match. A Team's Total Competition Raw Score is the sum of the Total Raw Scores from each of its matches.

10.2.2 Round Points

10.2.2.1 Memorial Round Points

A total of three (3) Round Points may be awarded to memorials in each Round. The individual Memorial judges' scores for each Team participating in a round are compared to those of the opposing Team. The highest score given by a memorial judge for one Team are compared to the highest score given the other Team, then the next highest, and finally the lowest. For each comparison, the Team with the higher score is awarded one (1) Round Point. If in any such comparison the two Teams' scores are equal, each Team is awarded one‑half (0.5) Round Point.

10.2.2.2 Oral Round Points

A total of six (6) Round Points may be awarded for oral argument scores in each Round. For each judge, the combined score awarded to each oralist from one Team shall be compared to the combined score awarded to each oralist from the other Team. For each judge, the higher scoring Team is awarded two (2) Round Points. If in any such comparison, the two Teams' scores are equal, each Team is awarded one (1) Round Point.

10.2.2.3 Total Round Points

In each Round, a Team's Total Round Points is the sum of the Team’s Memorial Round Points and Oral Round Points.

10.3 Two (2) Judge Panels

If only two judges score a given Memorial or a given Oral Round, the Administrator shall create a third score by averaging the scores of the two judges.

10.4 Determination of Winners and Rankings from Preliminary Rounds

10.4.1 Determining the Winner of a Match

In any given match, the Team receiving the greater of the nine (9) available Round Points wins the round. If the two Teams each receive 4.5 Round Points, the Team with the higher Total Raw Score wins the Round. If the two Teams have an equal number of Round Points and an equal Total Raw Score, the match is a draw.

10.4.2 Preliminary Round Rankings

(a) Teams shall be ranked by number of wins in the Preliminary Rounds, from highest to lowest.

(b) If two or more Teams have the same number of wins, the Team having the higher Total Competition Raw Score from the Preliminary Rounds shall be ranked higher.

(c) If two or more Teams have the same number of wins and the same Total Competition Raw Score, the Team with the higher Total Competition Round Points from the Preliminary Rounds shall be ranked higher.

10.4.3 Tie‑Breaking Procedure

If two or more Teams are tied after application of Rule 10.4.2, and the outcome of the determination does not affect (a) any Team’s entry into the Advanced Rounds, or (b) the pairing of any Teams in the Advanced Rounds of the Tournament, the Teams shall be ranked equally.

If, however, further determination is necessary (under either (a) or (b) above), the rankings shall be accomplished as follows:

(a) If only two Teams are tied and if the tied Teams have faced each other in the Preliminary Rounds, the winner of that match shall be ranked higher.

(b) If only two Teams are tied and the Teams have not faced each other in earlier Rounds, and time permits, the Administrator may schedule a match between the two Teams, with the Team with the lower Team number pleading Applicant. The match shall be conducted according to the scoring Rules for Preliminary Rounds. The winner of such a Round shall be ranked higher.

If neither of these methods breaks the tie, the Executive Director shall determine the method for breaking the tie. If the Executive Director cannot be timely contacted, the Administrator may break the tie, taking into consideration the interests of the Teams and the Competition as a whole.

10.5 Scoring Procedures for Advanced Rounds

The following scoring procedures and guidelines shall apply to the Advanced Rounds of applicable Tournaments.

10.5.1 Method of Scoring – Qualifying Tournaments

Judges of Advanced Rounds at each Qualifying Tournament shall make an independent review of the Team Memorials and oral arguments. Judges may employ a point scoring system of their individual choice in making their determinations, including the use of the scoring system from the Preliminary Rounds. The Administrator should provide a Preliminary Round Oral Scoresheet to the judges to use at their discretion. The decision regarding the winner of the Round shall be by majority vote of the judges. No ties are allowed.

Judges should judge the Teams on the overall quality of their performances, not on the underlying merits of the case. Judges need not give any particular fixed weight to either Memorials or oral arguments, but should take into account the Memorials and oral arguments as part of each Team's performance.

10.5.2 Method of Scoring – International Run-Off, Octafinal, Quarterfinal and Semifinal Rounds

In each match in the International Run-Off, Octafinal, Quarterfinal and Semifinal Rounds, scoring procedures for each pairing shall be conducted according to this Rule. Judges must keep secret from all Teams the exact score in each pairing, and each judge’s determination in the pairing; only the identity of the winning Team shall be revealed.

(a) Three (3) judges shall read the Applicant Memorial of the Team arguing Applicant and the Respondent Memorial of the Team arguing Respondent. The Team whose Memorial each judge determines is superior will receive one (1) point. If a judge determines that the two Memorials are of equal quality, each Team will receive one-half (0.5) point. Thus, three (3) points are allocated by the Memorials judges. Penalties from the Preliminary Rounds shall not apply in the Advanced Rounds.

(b) Three (3) judges shall sit for the Oral Round. The Team whose presentation each judge determines is superior will receive two (2) points. If a judge determines that the two oral presentations were of equal quality, each Team judge will receive one (1) point. Thus, six (6) points are allocated by the oral-round judges.

(c) The winner of the match is the Team with the greater of the nine (9) points allocated by Memorials and Oral Round judges.

10.5.3 Method of Scoring – World Championship Jessup Cup Round

Judges of the World Championship Jessup Cup Round shall follow the guidelines set out in Rule 10.5.1 for determining the winner of the World Championship Jessup Cup Round.

10.6 Ranking of Oralists

Total scores for each oralist in the Tournament shall be determined by adding the raw scores awarded to that oralist in each Preliminary Round in which the oralist argued (adjusted for any Penalties assessed against the oralist), and dividing this sum by the number of Preliminary Rounds in which the oralist argued.

Oralists shall be ranked from highest to lowest total score. Ties are permitted. If an oralist argued in only one (1) Preliminary Round, he or she is ineligible for ranking.

10.7 Ranking of Memorials

Total Memorial scores for each Team shall be determined by adding the Total Raw Score of a Team’s Applicant Memorial and the Total Raw Score of the Respondent Memorial, six (6) total judges’ scores. Team Memorials shall be ranked from the highest Total Memorial score to the lowest. Ties are permitted. Scores shall be adjusted for Penalties per Rule 11.0.

10.8 Reporting of Results

After the conclusion of each Tournament, each Team participating in such Tournament shall receive the following:

(a) a copy of individual Memorial judges' scoresheets and Penalties, if any, with attendant comments, if any;

(b) a copy of individual oral judge's scoresheets and Penalties, if any, with attendant comments, if any, from Preliminary Rounds of the Tournament ;

(c) a copy of the Overall Rankings of the Preliminary Rounds of the Tournament, with the Total accumulated Win‑Loss records, Overall Raw Scores, and Overall Round Points;

(d) a copy of the Oralist Rankings from the Preliminary Rounds of the Tournament;

(e) a copy of the Memorial Rankings from the Preliminary Rounds of the Tournament; and

(f) a summary of the Advanced Rounds of the Tournament.

OFFICIAL RULE 11.0 Penalties

11.1 Memorials Penalties

Memorials Penalties may be imposed by the Administrator and shall be deducted from each of the individual judges' scores on a Team’s Memorial. In the event that a Memorial is scored by only two (2) judges under Rule 10.3 et seq., Penalties shall be deducted from each of the two (2) judge's scores prior to calculating the third score. Provided, however, that the minimum adjusted raw score that any Team may receive from any individual Memorial judge is fifty (50) points. No further reduction may be made to scores after the minimum score is reached, regardless of unallocated Penalty points remaining.

In instances where only one Memorial is in violation of the Rule, Memorial Penalties may be deducted from the scores of the offending Memorial only.

The Administrator shall notify all affected Teams of imposed Penalties prior to the first Preliminary Round, and shall include with such notification a reasonable deadline for any appeals from the decision to impose Penalties. A Team may appeal any Penalty imposed against its Memorials in writing to the Administrator. The Executive Director shall decide upon the validity of any appeal from the imposition of a Penalty by the Administrator. No further appeal is available from this appellate decision of the Executive Director.

Penalties shall be assessed for violations of other Rules concerning the Memorials by reference to the following table:

Rule Number Summary Penalty

6.1 Tardiness in submitting Memorials 15 points (plus 3 points per day after one day)

6.2 Use of incorrect font or font-size, use of 3 points per violating page, up to a total of 15 points

font of inconsistent size, improper line

spacing, or improper format of block quotations

6.3.1 Failure to include all parts of Memorial, or 5 points for each part

inclusion of an unenumerated part

6.3.2 Substantive legal argument outside of 5 points (one-time penalty)

approved sections of Memorial

6.3.3 Improperly formatted Index of Authorities 2 points (one-time penalty)

6.4(a) Excessive length: Pleadings 15 points (one-time penalty)

6.4(b) Excessive length: Summary of Pleadings 2 points (one-time penalty)

6.4(c) Excessive length: Statement of Facts 2 points (one-time penalty)

6.6.1 or 6.6.2 Failure to include necessary information 2 points (one-time penalty)

on Memorial cover

6.7 Violation of anonymity 10 points (one-time penalty)

11.2 Oral Round Penalties

The Administrator shall impose an Oral Round Penalty only when he is satisfied that an event subject to such Penalty has occurred, if necessary after consultation with the judges, bailiff, Teams and spectators.

11.2.1 Complaint Procedure

If a Team believes that an infraction of the Rules has occurred during an Oral Round, the Team may notify the bailiff in writing within five (5) minutes of the conclusion of that Oral Round. If there is no bailiff, Teams must approach the Administrator with complaints. Written notification shall clearly describe the violation and the parties involved in the violation. The Team shall not directly approach the judges regarding a violation of these Rules. Failure by any Team to follow the procedures described in this paragraph shall result in a waiver of the Team’s complaint.

If one or more judges feel believe an infraction has occurred during an Oral Round, he shall notify the bailiff orally or in writing within five (5) minutes of the completion of the Oral Round. When possible, the matter should be brought to the bailiff outside of the attention of the other judges.

11.2.2 Deduction of Penalties by Judges Prohibited

Penalty points may be deducted only by the Administrator. In no instance shall judges themselves deduct from the scores of the oralists any Penalty points. Judges shall score the Oral Round as if no violation occurred.

11.2.3 Activity Subject to Oral-Round Penalties

Penalties may be assessed for violations during an Oral Round by reference to the following table. The Administrator shall deduct any Penalty from each of the Team's three combined oral score received from the judges, prior to determining the Oral Round Points.

Rule Summary Penalty

7.6 Improper courtroom communications 10 points

7.7.1 Scouting See Rule 7.6.1 for description of penalty.

7.10 Violation of anonymity in courtroom 15 points

11.2.4 Discretionary Penalties

In addition to the Penalties listed in Rule 11.2.3, the Administrator may assess up to fifteen (15) point Penalties for other violations of the letter or spirit of these Rules. The size of the Penalty shall correspond to the degree of the violation in the judgment of the Administrator. Discretionary Penalties shall be imposed only by the Administrator.

Such violations may include:

- engaging in poor sportsmanship;

- submitting multiple frivolous complaints against other Teams;

- engaging in inappropriate behavior at the counsel table during the Oral Rounds;

- exhibiting blatant disregard for the procedures or requirements outlined in the Rules.

11.2.5 Notice and Appeals

The Administrator shall notify Teams of his decision regarding imposition of any Oral Round Penalty as soon as practicable. Along with the decision, the Administrator shall set a reasonable deadline by which either Team may appeal the decision. If an appeal is submitted, the Administrator shall consult with the Executive Director in resolving the appeal. The Executive Director's decision, if any, on all appeals is final.

11.3 De Minimis Rule

The Administrator may waive or reduce the penalty for a de minimis Rule violation.

11.4 Power to Promulgate Additional Measures

The Executive Director may promulgate such other measures for the orderly conduct of the Competition or to correct deficiencies in the Competition. Administrators may, in consultation with and upon approval of the Executive Director, promulgate such other measures for the orderly conduct of the Qualifying Tournament. Modifications shall not violate the spirit of these Rules or the best interests of the Competition.

OFFICIAL RULE 12.0 Awards

12.1 The Shearman & Sterling World Championship Jessup Cup

The Team that wins the Jessup Cup World Championship Jessup Round will receive two (2) awards: a trophy to keep, and the Shearman & Sterling World Championship Jessup Cup to hold in trust for one year at its school. Such Team shall take full responsibility for the safety of the Jessup Cup while it is in their custody and is responsible for returning the Jessup Cup in polished condition to the Executive Director prior to the next year's International Tournament.

12.2 The Hardy C. Dillard Award

The Memorials of the Team with the highest Total Memorial Raw Score in any Qualifying Tournament shall be entered, without further action by the Team, to compete in the Hardy C. Dillard Award Competition.

Entries in the Dillard Competition shall be scored by a new panel of three (3) judges. The Hardy C. Dillard Award will be presented to the five (5) highest raw Memorial scores, unadjusted for penalties.

12.3 The Alona E. Evans Award

The Alona E. Evans Award is presented to the Teams with the five (5) highest Total Memorials Scores in the International Tournament.

12.4 The Richard Baxter Award

Memorials of Teams that receive the Alona E. Evans Award or the Hardy C. Dillard Award are entered into the Richard Baxter Award Competition. Entries in the Baxter Competition is scored by a new panel of three (3) judges.

There are two (2) Baxter Awards: one (1) for the Best Overall Applicant Memorial and one (1) for the Best Overall Respondent Memorial. The Best Applicant and Best Respondent Memorials shall be declared winners of the award. Baxter Award-winning Memorials shall be published in the corresponding year’s issue of the ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law.

12.5 The Spirit of the Jessup Award

.The Spirit of the Jessup Award was created in 1996 to recognize the Team that best exemplifies the Jessup spirit of camaraderie, academic excellence, competitiveness, and appreciation of fellow competitors. The winner is selected by vote of the Teams at the International Tournament or by the Executive Director after consultation with the Teams.

12.6 Other Awards

In each Tournament, the Administrator shall make arrangement for appropriate recognition of Teams that receive the top Total Memorial Scores, highest ranked oralists, and Teams that advance to the Advanced Rounds.