santaslayer
Active Member
http://media.uow.edu.au/news/2004/0928a/index.html
Nothing to do...dont wanna study so i thought id do a little promotional spamming for UoW.
UOW mooters talk medicine. . .
Sep 28, 2004
University of Wollongong law students are among the best in the country at using quick tongues and sharp wit to debate legal hypotheticals.
UOW law students Thomas Spohr, Molly Choucair, Joel Hiscox and Ben Motro have recently returned from a national legal debating competition called the SRM Torts Moot, where they finished a close second.
The event was run by the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) and was, for the first time, opened up to interstate teams.
The competing mooters had to prepare substantial written memorials (well researched statements of argument) and then participate in a ‘round-robin’ of moots over three days. The other competing universities included the University of Sydney, Macquarie University, University of Technology Sydney, University of Queensland and Queensland University of Technology.
The UOW team made it to the final and were faced with the twin challenges of a hypothetical problem of medical negligence, and the University of Queensland (UQ) moot team.
Specifically, the teams had to determine whether a patient who had relied on a medical expert’s assurances that he would perform a particular operation, could sue for damages on the basis that the operation was in fact carried out (without the patient’s knowledge) by a less experienced doctor. Complications had arisen and it was up to the mooters to establish the legal possibilities and ramifications.
Ruth Davis, lecturer in the Faculty of Law, was extremely pleased with the team’s efforts.
“They worked very hard in preparing for the written and oral aspects of the moot and their success was well deserved, especially considering this is our first attempt at entering this type of competition,” she said.
The teams also impressed senior solicitor Jodie Collins, who said that she was 'flabbergasted' at how good the speakers were.
"They were eloquent, strategic, tactical and very sharp under pressure - it was enjoyable to watch."
-RP
Nothing to do...dont wanna study so i thought id do a little promotional spamming for UoW.
UOW mooters talk medicine. . .
Sep 28, 2004
University of Wollongong law students are among the best in the country at using quick tongues and sharp wit to debate legal hypotheticals.
UOW law students Thomas Spohr, Molly Choucair, Joel Hiscox and Ben Motro have recently returned from a national legal debating competition called the SRM Torts Moot, where they finished a close second.
The event was run by the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) and was, for the first time, opened up to interstate teams.
The competing mooters had to prepare substantial written memorials (well researched statements of argument) and then participate in a ‘round-robin’ of moots over three days. The other competing universities included the University of Sydney, Macquarie University, University of Technology Sydney, University of Queensland and Queensland University of Technology.
The UOW team made it to the final and were faced with the twin challenges of a hypothetical problem of medical negligence, and the University of Queensland (UQ) moot team.
Specifically, the teams had to determine whether a patient who had relied on a medical expert’s assurances that he would perform a particular operation, could sue for damages on the basis that the operation was in fact carried out (without the patient’s knowledge) by a less experienced doctor. Complications had arisen and it was up to the mooters to establish the legal possibilities and ramifications.
Ruth Davis, lecturer in the Faculty of Law, was extremely pleased with the team’s efforts.
“They worked very hard in preparing for the written and oral aspects of the moot and their success was well deserved, especially considering this is our first attempt at entering this type of competition,” she said.
The teams also impressed senior solicitor Jodie Collins, who said that she was 'flabbergasted' at how good the speakers were.
"They were eloquent, strategic, tactical and very sharp under pressure - it was enjoyable to watch."
-RP
