Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T20:27:37.713Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Jessup Mooting Competition as a Vehicle for Teaching Public International Law*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2016

Craig Brown
Craig Brown*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Law, University of Western Ontario
Get access

Extract

The Philip G. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition is now well established as an annual event on the calendar of Canadian legal education. It may seem trite, therefore, to assert that the competition is a worthy pursuit for law students, that it should be preserved, and that a greater number of law schools should be encouraged to participate in it. The Jessup has great potential both as a teaching tool and as a basis for meaningful interaction among students from across the country and an attempt should be made to realize this potential. In this note, some suggestions are made for doing so.

Type
Notes and Comments
Information
Canadian Yearbook of International Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international , Volume 16 , 1979 , pp. 332 - 341
Copyright
Copyright © The Canadian Council on International Law / Conseil Canadien de Droit International, representing the Board of Editors, Canadian Yearbook of International Law / Comité de Rédaction, Annuaire Canadien de Droit International 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See “Association of Student International Law Societies: The Executive Secretary’s Report,” 71 Am. Soc’y Int’l L., Proc, 259, 260 (1971).

2 In 1978, for example, the problem concerned the law of war and the international protection of human rights; in 1977, the international export of nuclear explosives; in 1976, international investment; and in 1975, the law of international drainage basins. Copies of problems are available at nominal cost from the Association of Student International Law Societies, 2223 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008. The Association has indicated that it will soon be publishing a compendium of all past problems.

3 Professor Gerald Morris of the Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, kindly provided this information.

4 See Guide for Regional Administration of the Philip C. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition, published by the ASILS in 1976.

5 Letter to the writer from the 1978 University of Sherbrooke Jessup Team, March 21, 1978.

6 Although, in the past, teams from France have taken part without the assistance of translation services.

7 See Bulletin of the Canadian Council on International Law, Vol. V, No. 1, at 7 (March 28, 1978).

8 The publicity material for the Jessup Endowment — a fund which supports the competition in the U.S. — refers to the “incomparable forum for intellectual development and a unique bridge to late careers.”

9 There is a limit to the extent that non-participants can be involved with a current problem because the rules place a restriction on outside assistance. However, past problems have been used with considerable effect as a teaching tool in the U.S.: see Collins, “The Use of Jessup International Law Moot Court Cases in Political Science Departments,” 70 Am. J. Int’ l L. 809 (1976), and Letter to the Editor by Dean Sweeney, Tulane Law School, 71 Am. J. Int’ l L. 505 (1977).

10 MacDonald, , “An Historical Introduction to the Teaching of International Law in Canada,” 12 Canadian Yearbook of International Law 67, 110 (1974).Google Scholar

11 This information was kindly provided by Professor Gerald Morris.

12 See supra, note 10.

13 Official Rules for the International Division of the 1978 Philip G. Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition, 8.

14 Ibid., 1–2 (emphasis added).

15 Guide for Regional Administrators, supra note 4.