最新糖心Vlog

• Stephen Hall, Principles of International Law (LexisNexis Butterworths, 4th ed, 2014).
• James Crawford, Brownlie’s Principles of Public International Law (Oxford 最新糖心Vlog Press, 8th ed, 2012).
• Donald R Rothwell et al, International Law: Cases and Materials with 最新糖心Vlogn Perspectives (Cambridge 最新糖心Vlog Press, 2011).
• Gillian D Triggs, International Law: Contemporary Principles and Practices (LexisNexis Butterworths, 2nd ed, 2010).
• Vaughan Lowe, International Law (Oxford 最新糖心Vlog Press, 2007).
• Malcolm N Shaw, International Law (Cambridge 最新糖心Vlog Press, 6th ed, 2008).
• Peter Malanczuk (ed), Akehurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law(Routledge, 7th rev ed, 1997).
• Donald K Anton, Penelope Mathew and Wayne Morgan, International Law: Cases and Materials (Oxford 最新糖心Vlog Press, 2005).
• Sam Blay, Ryszard Piotrowicz and Martin Tsamenyi, Public International Law: An 最新糖心Vlogn Perspective (Oxford 最新糖心Vlog Press, 2nd ed, 2005).
• Robert Jennings and Arthur Watts (eds), Oppenheim’s International Law (Longman, 9th ed, 1992).
• David Harris, Cases and Materials on International Law (Sweet and Maxwell, 7th ed, 2010).
• Anthony E Cassimatis et al, An 最新糖心Vlogn Companion to Harris (Lawbook Co, 2nd ed, 2011).
• Martin Dixon, Textbook on International Law (Oxford 最新糖心Vlog Press, 6thed, 2007).
• Antonio Cassese, International Law (Oxford 最新糖心Vlog Press, 2nd ed, 2005).
• 最新糖心Vlogn Guide to Legal Citation (Melbourne 最新糖心Vlog Law Review Association, 3rd ed, 2010).

1.               Individual Paper 20%

Due Date: By Negotiation

The individual paper will be on the part of the Compromis allocated to you. The format may vary according to your preferences, incorporating elements of an academic essay or a detailed solution to a problem question, but must incorporate the following elements:

• Identification of the relevant legal principles
• Consideration of the nature and source of the relevant legal principles (e.g. binding or aspirational, treaty-based or customary international law, soft law etc)
• Consideration of whether the principles identified are binding on both parties to the dispute, or if not, what legal principles will be held to apply to both
• Presentation of the appropriate argument that should be put by each party given the factual information provided
• Identification of the strengths and weaknesses of each party’s argument.

An optional addition that you may wish to include in your paper, but which is not strictly required at length, is a critical analysis of the state of international law on this topic.

You need not aim to use all of the available words just because they are there, but you should feel free to use them if you have that much detail to cover. If you feel that the word limit is insufficient to cover the material, you may apply by email to the Course Coordinator for an increase in word limit.

The individual papers should comply with the requirements listed below under ‘Submission’.


2.               Group Applicant and Respondent Memorials 30%

Due Date: In accordance with the Jessup Moot rules

Please note – compliance with the Jessup Moot rules relating to date and time of submission is required. Failure to meet the Jessup rules will be penalised – submitting a copy for assessment in this course by 2pm on the following day will be acceptable, providing the copies required by the Jessup rules are submitted within the timelines dictated by the Jessup rules.

The group memorials must comply with all rules specified in the International rules and National rules of the Jessup competition. Any failures to comply with those rules may be punished either in accordance with the provisions listed below, or in accordance with the rules (International and/or National) of the Jessup competition, or in any other appropriate manner at the discretion of the Course Coordinator.

The group memorials assessed will be those submitted by the team to the Jessup competition. The memorials will be assessed against the following criteria:

• Coherent organisation of memorial
• Logical structure of argument
• Clarity of expression
• Identification of relevant legal principles
• Identification of the sources and nature of those principles
• Identification of the application of the principles to the parties
• Appropriate argument for each party given the factual information provided
• Presentation of a balanced and persuasive argument (including acknowledgement and appropriate handling of weaknesses)
• Compliance with obligations to the court

Each member of the group will receive the group mark for this assessment item, except in exceptional circumstances. Without limiting the circumstances that will be considered relevant, a common mark is awarded to group work on the basis that the contribution and performance of each student has been roughly equal. Each student’s contribution is measured in respect of the quality of the academic work they individually performed within the group, but also takes into account their contribution to the group more broadly (including performance of administrative tasks, regularity and equity of contribution, cooperative behaviour, time and task management etc).

If inequity of contribution is identified as an issue, the student(s) involved will be informed of the manner in which it is believed that have performed unequally, and will be asked to explain their contribution to the group and justify why they believe they are entitled to share in the joint group mark. Having considered all relevant submissions from group members, the Course Coordinator will decide as to whether individual marks should be awarded to a student or students, and if so, what those marks should be.

Students experiencing group work issues are urged to contact the Course Coordinator at the earliest possible opportunity. When a difficulty is notified, action will then be taken to seek a cooperative solution to the problem. Difficulties notified only after group work has been completed are unlikely to justify separate marks being awarded.


3.               Oral Presentations 50%

Each student will be expected to participate in moots in Adelaide (most of which will be in January) in preparation for the oral rounds of the Jessup competition. Each student will be assessed on two oral presentations, which will be undertaken as close as possible to the team’s departure to Canberra. Each exercise will be marked by either the Course Coordinator or the guest judge, and an average of the two marks awarded will be credited to the final grade.

The assessment criteria will mainly follow the Jessup guidelines, which are:

• knowledge of law (approximately worth 30% of each oralist’s score);
• application of law to the facts (approximately worth 25% of each oralist’s score);
• ingenuity and ability to answer questions (approximately worth 30% of each oralist’s score);
• style, poise, courtesy and demeanour (approximately worth 10% of each oralist’s score); and
• time management and organization (approximately worth 5% of each oralist’s score).

The assessment criteria will also take into account your ability to anticipate and persuasively respond to your opponent’s argument, your compliance with appropriate ethical and procedural obligations, and the overall quality of your engagement with the judge(s).

The availability of a remark for oral presentation marks may, for practical reasons, be more limited than with written assessment. In the extremely unlikely event that you feel the final oral presentation mark awarded to you is not fair, I encourage you to discuss this with me. If there is a recording of your presentation (and some of your presentations will normally be recorded on MyUni) then the recording could be re-marked – you would have the usual 10 business days (from the date on which you are advised of your oral presentation marks) in which to lodge a remark application. If there are no recordings, and I am not convinced by your argument, the only avenue available would be a formal appeal under the provisions of the Student Grievance Resolution Process. No student has ever pursued a remark application or appeal in my time as Course Coordinator of the Jessup Moot, but I include this information for the sake of completeness.

Students must retain a copy of all assignments submitted.

All assignments in this course are to be submitted electronically by email to the Course Coordinator. Students may be requested to provide in hard copy an Assignment Cover Sheet that accurately states the word length, and contains a signed declaration that the assignment consists of the students own work. A student’s results will be withheld until such time as the student has signed the Assignment Cover Sheet. Markers can refuse to accept assignments which do not have a signed acknowledgement of the 最新糖心Vlog’s policy on plagiarism.

All written work in the Law school is required to comply with the approved Law School style guide, The 最新糖心Vlogn Guide to Legal Citation.

The quality of English expression is considered to be an integral part of the assessment process.

Extensions: Requests for extensions must be made electronically according to law school policy. Extensions will be granted only for unexpected illness, hardship or on compassionate grounds in accordance with 最新糖心Vlog Policy. Work commitments, travel, holidays or sporting engagements are not unexpected circumstances.

1. For the Group Memorials, penalties for any breach of the Jessup Moot rules apply at the discretion of the Course Coordinator.
2. For Individual Papers, standard penalties apply:
   1. Late Submission: Submission penalties of 5% of the total mark possible will be deducted for every 24 hours or part thereof that it is late, including each day on a weekend. For example, an essay graded 63% will have 5% deducted if it is one hour late, for a final grade of 58%, 10% if it is 25 hours late, etc.
   2. Word Length: Assignments which exceed the allocated length (word length or page limit) will be subject to a penalty of 5% of total marks possible per 100 words or part thereof (ie with a word limit of 3,000, an essay graded 63% will have 5% deducted if it is 3001 words long, for a final grade of 58%, 10% if it is 3101 words long, etc). Words are calculated including all footnotes and headings within the text but excluding cover page information. Quotations and all referencing information are included in the word count.

Turnaround time: Written feedback will be provided on the individual papers and draft memorials within one week of submission. Feedback on oral presentations will be provided at the conclusion of each moot session. The individual papers and group memorials will be returned to students after the Jessup Moot competition is completed. Students will be notified by email when assignments are ready for collection from the Law School Front Office

Courses for which a result of conceded pass has been obtained may not be presented towards the degree requirements for the Bachelor of Laws or the Honours Degree of Bachelor of Laws programs, or any postgraduate law program, nor to satisfy prerequisite requirements within any law course.

The 最新糖心Vlog Writing Centre provides academic learning and language development services and resources for local, international, undergraduate and postgraduate coursework students enrolled at the 最新糖心Vlog of Adelaide.

Practical advice and strategies for students to master reading, writing, note-taking, time management, oral presentation skills, referencing techniques and exam preparation for success at university through seminars, workshops and individual consultations.

For more information please check out the Writing Centre website at http://www.adelaide.edu.au/writingcentre/

Further information regarding the Law School Policies and Procedures in relation to Supplementary Assessment, Extensions, and Remarks etc can be found at:

Plagiarism and other forms of cheating

Plagiarism is a serious act of academic misconduct. All students must be familiar with the Adelaide Law School Enrolment Guide 2014, and should note in particular the sections relating to plagiarism, grievance procedures and academic conduct within the Law School and the 最新糖心Vlog.

Plagiarism is a serious matter and is treated as such by the Law School and the 最新糖心Vlog. Please be aware that “academic dishonesty” (which goes beyond plagiarism) can be a ground for a refusal by the Supreme Court of South 最新糖心Vlog to refuse to admit a person to practice as a legal practitioner in South 最新糖心Vlog.

Academic honesty is an essential aspect of ethical and honest behaviour, which is central to the practice of the law and an understanding of what it is to be a lawyer.