The Queen’s Law team finished in first place at this year’s provincial Walsh Family Law Moot. They brought home the Walsh Cup and three other major awards:  

•    Best Appellant’s Factum to Peter Arnaudov, Law’22, and Nicholas Belanger, Law’23; 
•    Best Respondent’s Factum to Sarah Taylor and Nicole Burrows, both Law’23; and
•    Third Place Oralist to Nicole Burrows. 

“The most important aspect of the competition is teamwork and collaboration. I was impressed with the way this team quickly came together – and so were the judges,” says coach Linda Smith, Law’92, an experienced family law lawyer. 

Student coach Anita Zamani, Law’22, saw first-hand the oralists’ hard work and dedication. “Countless hours were spent working on the written factums and the oral arguments – all for the purpose of producing valuable results we would be proud of,” she says. “Hats off to the mooters for putting in all their time and energy!” 

This year’s family law case involved two main issues: a clash between the two parents on the religious upbringing and education of their children after the parents had already reached consent; and whether an accepted offer to settle on spousal support should be set aside for failure to make financial disclosure."

Moot teams from law schools across Ontario appeared before various judges of the Superior Court of Ontario and the Ontario Court of Appeal. 

Arnaudov shares advice for responding to judges’ questions effectively. “It is important to remember that you are having a conversation with a judge who is trying to better understand your position and test whether your arguments are sound and capable of standing under scrutiny,” he explains. “Answering questions also requires answering exactly what a judge asked; being a politician is not something a judge will appreciate in court.

“When a judge asks a question, this can be an opportunity to pivot your answer into something you want to address, he continues. “This tactic is especially useful for a moot, where time is of the essence.”

Belanger points out a key factor in writing an award-winning factum. “Each side, Appellants and Respondents, wrote four drafts prior to the final submission and this provided many opportunities for feedback from our supervisor and student coach,” he says. “We were able to polish our factum at each stage of the writing process before moving on to the next.”

Another important aspect is synergy. “There is no universal approach as it will depend on the team members’ strengths and weaknesses, but I believe that constant communication is key, even if each person only tackles a discrete issue,” says Belanger. “A second opinion always helps, as does your partner’s support. It is also useful to entertain opposing arguments or different ways to distinguish cases by discussing issues with the opposing team.”

“Our supervisor and student coach provided help and guidance at every stage of the process, from our first attempt at our factums to setting up fantastic judges and practitioners to rehearse with,” says Burrows. “They shared their wisdom, experience, and support to help us become comfortable and confident doing something we had never done before.” 

“Our skills and confidence increased dramatically from the first draft of our factum and first practice to the day of the competition,” adds Taylor. 

Seven others advised the team by judging practice sessions. These volunteers included local lawyers and previous Walsh mooters Paul Burry, Law’21, Robert Murphy, Law’20, and Andrew Bala, Law’17; family law practitioner Cedar Swartz- Fisher; Professor Nick Bala, Law’77; Queen’s Family Law Clinic Review Counsel Jane Mundy, Law’18; and Superior Court Justice Clyde Smith.

The Queen’s team highly recommends mooting to their peers. “Mooting offered the best advocacy experience a law student could hope for and the opportunity to practice in a real court setting in front of numerous judges and lawyers,” says Taylor. “We were asked questions and given insightful feedback, making us more comfortable with litigation.” 

“We would like to let all law students know that this is a very valuable experience, regardless of personality or interest in litigation,” adds Belanger. “We learned just as much about ourselves and our ability to persevere as we did about legal advocacy and family law. We also developed our ability to work in a team, both with our fellow oralists and our supervisor and coach, in a way that we never had before. After winning this moot, we all feel as though we can go anywhere we want with our legal careers.”