2022-23

THE RULE
BOOK
1st International
Negotiation & Mediation
Competition 2023
in association with
Wadia Ghandy & Co.

PRESENTED BY
@adrc.nmims
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Titles and Definitions 1

Language 2

Team Composition 2

Rounds 2

Competition Format 3

Registration Process 4

Problem 4

Disclosure of Confidential Information 4

Interpretation of the Problem 4

Exhibits and Props 5

Assessors 5

Time Limit 5

Assessment 6

Rules Regarding Tie-breaker 6

Written Submissions 6

Anonymity 7

Scouting 7

Penalties for Violations and Powers to Take Additional Measures 7

Rule-Making Power 7

Ethics Code 8

Annexures 9
 2022-23

TITLES & DEFINITIONS

1. The present rules shall be called the NMIMS KIRIT P. MEHTA SCHOOL OF LAW (ADR
Rules, Procedure and Penalties) 2023 or INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATION AND
MEDIATION COMPETITION 2023 (Hereinafter referred to as “Competition”) Rules
and Procedures 2023 and shall come in force, on such date as notified by the ADR
Committee (ADRC) to the student body.

2. Definitions:
a. “Assessment Criteria” means the scoring and evaluating criteria set out for the
Assessors.
b. “Assessor” or a “Judge” means a lawyer or an academician nominated and/or selected
by the Organizing Committee who evaluates and scores the performance of the
Participating Team during a Mediation/Negotiation Session in accordance with the
Assessment Criteria.
c. “BATNA” means the Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement, and refers to what is
the most feasible step for a party to take, if the Parties fail to reach an agreement.
d. “Competition” shall mean the International Negotiation and Mediation Competition
2023.
e. “Competition Rules” means the rules and guidelines mentioned, herein.
f. “Caucus” refers to a private conference between co-mediators and negotiators.
g. “Confidential Information” means the factual background information of the problem
for the exclusive use of the Negotiators and the Assessors, not the Mediators.
h. “Mediator” refers to the neutral party who will facilitate the negotiation.
i. “Mediation Room” refers to the classrooms in the Kirit P. Mehta School of Law’s
campus.
j. “Negotiation Room” refers to the classrooms in the Kirit P. Mehta School of Law’s
campus.
k. “Negotiating Team in the Mediation Segment” refers to two participants out of a team of
three, acting in the capacity of client and counsel for the purposes of the competition.
l. “Negotiating Team refers to the client and the counsel participating in the Negotiation
Segment".
m. “Negotiator” means the direct party to the dispute or a representative of the party
directly subjected to the mediation/negotiation.
n. “Organizing Committee” means the Alternative Dispute Resolution Committee of
NMIMS Kirit P. Mehta School of Law, 2022-23.
o. “Participant”refers to any person participating in this Competition as a negotiator or
mediator.
p. “Problem” refers to the set of background factual information provided by the
Organizing Committee to the participants for the purpose of the Mediation/Negotiation
Session.
q. “Timekeeper” means a person appointed by the Organizing Committee to keep time
during a Mediation/Negotiation Session.
r. WATNA” means the Worst Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement, and refers to the
worst outcome if negotiation fails.
ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 1
 2022-23

LANGUAGE
The official language of the Competition shall be English.

TEAM COMPOSITION
1. NEGOTIATION SEGMENT: Each participating team will consist of two eligible students
from the same university, i.e., a client and a counsel. The overall composition of the
participants cannot be changed after it has been notified to the Organizing Committee.
These participants shall not be allowed to switch roles at any time after the
competition of Preliminary Rounds of the Competition. All participants will be assigned
a code by the Organizing Committee and are strictly advised to adhere to the same.
2. MEDIATION SEGMENT: Each participating team will consist of three eligible students
from the same university, i.e., a client and a counsel, and a mediator. The overall
composition of the participants cannot be changed after it has been notified to the
Organizing Committee. These participants shall not be allowed to switch roles at any
time after the competition of Preliminary Rounds of the Competition. All participants
will be assigned a code by the Organizing Committee and are strictly advised to adhere
to the same.

ROUNDS
1. Both formats of the Competition shall be conducted in four rounds, namely
Preliminary Round, the Quarter-Final Round, the Semi-Final Round, and the Final
Round. The event will be concluded with a Valedictory Ceremony and a Felicitation
ceremony for the Guest judges.
2. The Preliminary round will consist of two rounds wherein each team will be accorded
an opportunity to represent both sides in the respective rounds. The duration of the
Preliminary rounds will be 45 minutes each, followed by a question-and-answer round
by the Judges for a duration of 10 minutes, subject to scoring.
3. The duration of the Quarter Final rounds will be 60 minutes each, followed by a
question-and-answer round by the Judges for a duration of 10 minutes, subject to
scoring.
4. The duration of the Semi Final rounds will be 75 minutes each, followed by a question-
and-answer round by the Judges for a duration of 10 minutes, subject to scoring.
5. The duration of the Final rounds will be 90 minutes each, followed by a question-and-
answer round by the Judges for a duration of 10 minutes, subject to scoring.
6. 32 teams for each format of Negotiation and Mediation will compete in 2 Preliminary
rounds. For the Preliminary Rounds 1 and 2, the qualification of 08 teams to the
subsequent rounds will be decided based on progression and the highest scoring teams
would proceed for further participation. For all subsequent rounds, the qualification of

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 2
 2022-23

teams will be decided on the basis of a Knock-out mode of scoring wherein the team
getting the higher score against its opposing team in the same room, will qualify for the
next round. For additional details, please refer to Chapters XII and XIII of this Competition
Rules and the Event Brochure.

COMPETITION FORMAT
1. The Preliminary Rounds 1 and 2 of the Competition will be held virtually, via the Zoom
platform. The Quarter-Final, Semi-Final and Final Rounds of the Competition will be
held physically on the Campus of NMIMS School of Law, Mumbai, Maharashtra.
2. The Competition would proceed in an online mode throughout the course of its
completion for international teams.
3. The Online rounds will be held on 19th- 20th August 2023 and the Offline Rounds will
be held from 2nd-3rd September 2023.
4. If any one or more team member/s back out or fail to attend the round, the entire
team will be disqualified.
5. The participants are not allowed to use their real names during the session/round.
6. Participants must ensure that they have a stable internet connection.
7. The participants have to remain seated according to the assigned code and their
respective roles.
8. A Mediation Session will consist of two Negotiator teams representing both sides of the
dispute and two co-mediators engaging in the mediation process.
9. A Negotiation Session will consist of two Negotiator teams representing both sides of
the Problem engaging in the Negotiation process.
10. Each participant shall act as a client and a counsel in the preliminary rounds.
Accordingly, after the two preliminary rounds, each participant must have acted as a
client and a counsel, individually.
11. Each round will have a set of Problems and confidential information for each side. The
co-mediators in the Mediation Segment are required to facilitate an agreement
between the two negotiator teams.
12. The Confidential Information will be sent 30 minutes prior to the start of the round,
via E-Mail to the participants of their respective sides.
13. The co-mediators, from two different teams, will act in coordination with each other
and distribute roles equally, including their roles during Caucus. They will be in the
Courtroom at all times and work together as a team.
14. Mediators may choose to start the session with a joint conference and engage in a
caucus at a later stage or they may choose to start with a caucus. During the caucus,
the other team will have to wait outside the Mediation Rooms and would be asked to
join back after the conclusion of the caucus.
15. If any one or more team members back out or fail to attend a particular round, the
entire team will be disqualified.
ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 3
 2022-23

REGISTRATION PROCESS
1. Upon the conclusion of the process of Provisional registration, as is given in the Event
Brochure, the Competition Administrator will notify the confirmation of slots, along
with the payment link to the selected universities at the earliest.
2. The teams allotted a slot in this process must make the payment of the registration
fee latest by 10.08.2023, failing which the slot shall be deemed to have been
forfeited.
3. The Competition administrator shall have the right to allot any forfeited slot to other
teams.
4. The link for payment will be mailed to the Alternative Dispute Resolution body of the
respective universities to which the selected teams belong.
5. Teams may get access to the Provisional Registration form: here

PROBLEM
The Problem of all the rounds shall be released tentatively on 11.08.2023 by the
Competition Administrator. Confidential Information will be released to the Negotiating
teams 30 minutes before the round, after revealing to each negotiating team, the disputing
party they would be representing. Any clarifications with respect to the same can be
submitted by the participating teams to the Competition Administrator by 15.08.2023 via
email to kpmsol.adrcommittee@gmail.com.

DISCLOSURE OF
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
Assessors and negotiators must not directly or indirectly disclose contents of the
confidential information to any other person, especially the mediators in the Mediation
segment. Negotiators may disclose their confidential information in the course of the
session. Any violation of this rule shall result in immediate disqualification. The discretion
ofthe Organizing Committee shall be final in this regard.

INTERPRETATION OF THE
PROBLEM
Every effort will be made to ensure that the problem is unambiguous. While participants
shall not invent material new facts, the facts of the problem are subject to reasonable

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 4
 2022-23

interpretation. Whether a participant’s interpretation is reasonable is a matter entirely

within the discretion of the Assessors. Participants may draw reasonable inferences from
the facts provided.

EXHIBITS AND PROPS

During the session, each participant can bring his/her/their own notes, books, files and
can, if need be, make their own notes on separate sheets of paper. Other props shall be
permissible, only with the prior permission of the Organizing Committee.

ASSESSORS
1. In each session, two or more experienced professionals will serve as Assessors.
2. The panel of assessors in the Preliminary Rounds, Quarter-Final Rounds and Semi-
Final Rounds shall comprise two judges, and the Final Rounds shall consist of three
judges.
3. The Assessors will evaluate and score the performance of the participants according
to the Assessment Criteria annexed herein.
4. The Organizing Committee will make every effort to ensure that the Assessors are
independent and impartial to the participants they are involved with.

TIME LIMIT
1. The Preliminary Rounds 1 and 2 of the Mediation and Negotiation Segments will be for
a period of 45 minutes followed by a feedback/question-and-answer session of 10
minutes.
2. The Quarter Final Rounds of the Mediation and Negotiation Segments will be for a
period of 60 minutes followed by a feedback/question-and-answer session of 10
minutes.
3. The Semi-Final Rounds of the Mediation and Negotiation Segments will be for a period
of 75 minutes followed by a feedback/question-and-answer session of 10 minutes.
4. The Final Rounds of the Mediation and Negotiation Segments will be for a period of 90
minutes followed by a feedback/question-and-answer session of 10 minutes.
5. A caucus session for the Mediation Round should last for a maximum of 5 minutes.
6. Time period of 10 minutes (5 minutes per team) for questions from or feedback by the
7. Judges which will be scored by the Judges.
8. In the Negotiation segment, the teams will not be given the option to invoke a private
caucus, but may communicate with each other audibly (such that the Assessors and
other party can hear them) within the round itself.
ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 5
 2022-23

9. Assessors may penalize participants who allow the session to run excessively beyond
the time period allotted in the rules. However, the assessors in their discretion,
considering the circumstances, may permit additional time beyond the time period
stipulated for the consultation. If the extended time allows an opportunity for a team to
gather more information than other teams, such circumstance should be taken into
consideration by the assessors in making their final decision.

ASSESSMENT
Following the end of the Mediation/Negotiation Session, the participants shall leave the
Mediation/Negotiation Rooms and the assessors will evaluate the performance of each
competing team in accordance with the instructions set out. The Assessors would be
required to adhere to a scoring matrix for evaluating and scoring the teams during the
Preliminary rounds as the Qualification of teams in the Preliminary Rounds 1 and 2 would
be on the basis of progression, i.e., the basis of the total scores received in the Preliminary
Rounds 1 and 2, the top 8 teams will qualify to proceed for the offline rounds, i.e., the
Quarter-Final rounds onward. The Quarter-Final Rounds and the Semi- Final Rounds shall
be Knock-Out Rounds and the team winning in each Negotiation/Mediation room will
qualify for the subsequent stages. The winning team from the Semi-Final Rounds will
advance to the Final Round.

RULE REGARDING TIE-

BREAKER
1. In case of a tie between the scores of mediators, preference shall be given to the
mediator who has received more marks in the "Effective Mediation Strategy” portion
of the score sheet.
2. In case of a tie between the scores of negotiator teams, preference shall be given to
the negotiator team who has received more marks in the “Overall Negotiation
Strategy” portion of the score sheet.

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
There shall be no written submission for any session.

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 6
 2022-23

ANONYMITY
The participants shall not, at any stage of the Competition, whether during a session or
otherwise, disclose their names to the assessors and shall only use their assigned team
codes. Non-compliance with this rule entails immediate disqualification from the
Competition.

SCOUTING
Team members shall not be allowed to observe the sessions of other teams. Scouting is
strictly prohibited, and any violation of this rule entails loss of points or even
disqualification.

PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS

AND POWERS TO TAKE
ADDITIONAL MEASURES
1. Any violation of these rules shall lead to immediate disqualification of the participant
from the Competition.
2. For any variation in this regard or in case of ambiguity, the decision of the Organizing
Committee shall be final.
3. The Organizing Committee is empowered to take every possible measure necessary
for the proper organization of the Competition.
4. The participants shall maintain discipline and ensure that no damages are caused to
any person or property.

RULE MAKING POWER

The Organizing Committee is entitled to draft the rules of the Competition and change
them, including the format of the Competition, with prior intimation.

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 7
 2022-23

ETHICS CODE
The Organizing Committee has the right to expect a minimum standard of acceptable
conduct by participants, including:
1. The aim of each participant in the session should be to try and reach an amicable
solution.
2. The negotiating teams are expected to cooperate with the mediators during the
session.
3. The participants shall treat other members in the session with dignity and respect.
Verbal abuse, threats, acts of intimidation, violence, etc. will not be tolerated.
4. Any kind of abusive language is strictly prohibited.
5. Making derogatory remarks about any participant during the session is prohibited.
6. Any participant in the session, who is subjected to unacceptable behaviour, should
politely and immediately communicate to the person that they are not comfortable
with the discussion, and ask him/her/them to withdraw from the situation.
7. Acts that endanger the health and safety of any participant or which substantially
interfere with the orderly operation of the session will not be tolerated.
8. The participants are expected to be dressed in business formal i.e., a White Shirt,
Black Pants/Trousers and a Black Blazer, for the duration of the Competition.

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 8
 2022-23

ANNEXURE I
Scoresheet for Mediator

Team Code:
Room No.:
Name of Judge:

No. Judging Criteria Marks

OPENING STATEMENT– has the Mediator managed to:

1. Explain the. mediation process and its advantages?
2. Explain the importance and meaning of neutrality,
impartiality and confidentiality?
1 3. Lay out the structure of the session? Out of 10
4. Explain the extent and limitations of his/her/their role?
5. Explain the purpose and scope of caucuses and cross
caucuses?

ESTABLISHING A CORDIAL ENVIRONMENT– has the

Mediator:
1. Set out/assisted in the setting out of ground rules?
2. Made the parties comfortable with him/her/them, the
2 Out of 10
setting and with each other?
3. Created the appropriate tone for the session, be it formal
or informal, and maintained it or altered it, as necessary,
throughout the session?

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 9
 2022-23

No. Judging Criteria Marks

INFORMATION GATHERING- has the Mediator:

1. Framed questions in a manner conducive to receiving
the maximum relevant information? (for instance, are
the questions open-ended or closed? Are they framed
narrowly or broadly?)
3 2. Gained the trust of the parties so as to get confidential Out of 10
information?
3. Maintained a neutral and unbiased image while asking
questions?
4. Assisted the parties in identifying their own interests?
5. Managed time efficiently?

USE OF CAUCUSES- has the Mediator:

1. Ensured that parties understand the confidentiality of a
caucus?
2. Called a caucus for an appropriate purpose?
4 Out of 10
3. Acquired the relevant information/accomplished the
desired task within the prescribed time?
4. Used caucuses in a balanced way with respect to the time
and opportunity given to both parties?

COOPERATION BETWEEN MEDIATORS– have the

Mediators:
1. Collaborated effectively on their opening statement?
2. Worked with each other during the information gathering
5 and option generation phases? Out of 15
3. Used a similar and consistent approach towards the
parties?
4. Supported each other throughout the process and
worked as a team?

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 10
 2022-23

No. Judging Criteria Marks

FACILITATING OPTION GENERATION – has the Mediator:

1. Encouraged parties to be realistic and ethical in their
approach to a settlement?
6 2. Ensured that all necessary elements of the problem are Out of 15
dealt with in the options generated?
3. Encouraged parties to view the session as positive sum
game (win-win options are available)?

PROFILING PARTIES’ INTERESTS - has the Mediator:

1. Determined what the crucial interests and needs of each
party are?
2. Identified the common and conflicting interests?
7 3. Helped the parties in identifying their own interests? Out of 10
4. Helped parties separate their interests from their
positions?
5. Identified zones of possible agreements in order to bring
the parties closer to settlement?

EFFECTIVE MEDIATION STRATEGY - has the Mediator:

1. Maintained impartiality, neutrality and confidentiality
throughout the session?
2. Used common and conflicting interests effectively?
3. Facilitated an open conversation and intervened at the
right moment?
8 Out of 20
4. Summarised and rephrased whenever appropriate?
5. Managed time efficiently through out the session?
6. Dealt with emotions in a manner that is conducive to a
peaceful and successful session?
7. Did the mediator answer questions correctly during the
feedback round?

TOTAL 100

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 11
 2022-23

ANNEXURE II
Scoresheet for Client/Counsel
in the Mediation Segment

Team Code:
Room No.:
Name of Judge:

No. Judging Criteria Marks

INTRODUCTION–
1. Is the client/counsel in their ‘character’?
2. Has the client/counsel appropriately summarized the
factual matrix so far?
1 3. Has the client/counsel set a cordial tone for the session? Out of 10
4. Has the client/counsel conveyed their interests
succinctly?
5. Has the client/counsel shown their willingness to
collaborate?

TEAM WORK AND RELATIONSHIP BUILDING–

1. How well were the roles divided between the client-
counsel pair? Did the division of roles suit the
undertaken strategy?
2. Have the client-counsel divided subject matter in an
2 equitable and role-appropriate manner? Out of 10
3. Have the members communicated effectively with each
other?
4. Do the mannerisms of both team members indicate that
they are comfortable working with each other and/or
trust each other?

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 12
 2022-23

No. Judging Criteria Marks

IDENTIFYING & ADVANCING PARTY’S INTERESTS–

1. Did the client/counsel distinguish between the positions
and interests of the other party?
2. Did the client/counsel use objective criteria in advancing
their needs and interests?
3. Did the client/counsel attempt to understand and
respect the interests of the other party?
3 4. Did the client/counsel understand which interests are Out of 15
mutual and which are conflicting and use this to their
advantage?
5. Did the client/counsel show flexibility in the light of
new/unforeseen information?
6. Did the client/counsel manage to secure all/ most of
their primary interests? If not, did they concede on an
interest as a strategic choice?

NEGOTIATION STRATEGY AND GENERATING CREATIVE

SOLUTIONS
1. Did the client/counsel come up with solutions that have a
legitimate basis and are feasible in the long run?
2. Did the client/counsel combat impasse/other obstacles
4 efficiently? Out of 20
3. Did the client/counsel discuss settlement terms in
sufficient detail?
4. How well did the client/counsel’s options advance their
own interests?
5. Efficient use of BATNA/WATNA.

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 13
 2022-23

No. Judging Criteria Marks

INFORMATION GATHERING–
1. Has the client/counsel displayed active listening skills?
2. How broadly has the client/counsel defined the idea of relevant
5 information? Out of 10
3. Has the client/counsel gathered all the information he/she
would need to distinguish between positions, needs and
interests of the other party?

COLLABORATING WITH THE OTHER PARTY-

1. Did the client/counsel show flexibility and actively collaborate
with the other party?
2. Did the client/counsel attempt to build trust and a mutual
6 relationship? Out of 10
3. Did the client/counsel participate in a brainstorming process
and come up with creative solutions?
4. Was the client/counsel open minded about the ideas of the
other party?

OVERALL CONDUCT AND EFFECTIVE CONCLUSION OF SESSION-

1. Did the client/counsel manage their own time efficiently?
2. Were the Client/Counsel respectful of the opposing party’s
opinions and did they handle emotionally charged moments
efficiently?
3. Did the client/counsel use their confidential information
7 strategically? Out of 25
4. Did the client/counsel negotiate in good faith and use ethical
and legitimate methods?
5. Did the client/counsel deal with concerns and emotions
appropriately?
6. Did the client/counsel answer questions correctly during the
feedback round?

TOTAL 100

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 14
 2022-23

ANNEXURE II
Scoresheet for Client/Counsel
in the Negotiation Segment

Team Code:
Room No.:
Name of Judge:

No. Judging Criteria Marks

INTRODUCTION–
1. Is the client/counsel in their ‘character’?
2. Has the client/counsel appropriately summarised the
factual matrix so far?
1 3. Has the client/counsel set a cordial tone for the session? Out of 10
4. Has the client/counsel conveyed their interests
succinctly?
5. Has the client/counsel shown their willingness to
collaborate?

TEAM WORK AND RELATIONSHIP BUILDING–

1. How well were the roles divided between the client-
counsel pair? Did the division of roles suit the
undertaken strategy?
2. Have the client-counsel divided subject matter in an
2 equitable and role-appropriate manner? Out of 10
3. Have the members communicated effectively with each
other?
4. Do the mannerisms of both team members indicate that
they are comfortable working with each other and/or
trust each other?

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE15
 2022-23

No. Judging Criteria Marks

IDENTIFYING & ADVANCING PARTY’S INTERESTS–

1. Did the client/counsel distinguish between the positions
and interests of the other party?
2. Did the client/counsel use objective criteria in advancing
their needs and interests?
3. Did the client/counsel attempt to understand and
respect the interests of the other party?
3 4. Did the client/counsel understand which interests are Out of 15
mutual and which are conflicting and use this to their
advantage?
5. Did the client/counsel show flexibility in the light of
new/unforeseen information?
6. Did the client/counsel manage to secure all/ most of
their primary interests? If not, did they concede on an
interest as a strategic choice?

NEGOTIATION STRATEGY AND GENERATING CREATIVE

SOLUTIONS
1. Did the client/counsel come up with solutions that have a
legitimate basis and are feasible in the long run?
2. Did the client/counsel combat impasse/other obstacles
4 efficiently? Out of 20
3. Did the client/counsel discuss settlement terms in
sufficient detail?
4. How well did the client/counsel’s options advance their
own interests?
5. Efficient use of BATNA/WATNA.

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 16
 2022-23

No. Judging Criteria Marks

INFORMATION GATHERING–
1. Has the client/counsel displayed active listening skills?
2. How broadly has the client/counsel defined the idea of relevant
5 information? Out of 10
3. Has the client/counsel gathered all the information he/she
would need to distinguish between positions, needs and
interests of the other party?

COLLABORATING WITH THE OTHER PARTY-

1. Did the client/counsel show flexibility and actively collaborate
with the other party?
2. Did the client/counsel attempt to build trust and a mutual
6 relationship? Out of 10
3. Did the client/counsel participate in a brainstorming process
and come up with creative solutions?
4. Was the client/counsel open minded about the ideas of the
other party?

OVERALL CONDUCT AND EFFECTIVE CONCLUSION OF SESSION-

1. Did the client/counsel manage their own time efficiently?
2. Were the Client/Counsel respectful of the opposing party’s
opinions and did they handle emotionally charged moments
efficiently?
3. Did the client/counsel use their confidential information
7 strategically? Out of 25
4. Did the client/counsel negotiate in good faith and use ethical
and legitimate methods?
5. Did the client/counsel deal with concerns and emotions
appropriately?
6. Did the client/counsel answer questions correctly during the
feedback round?

TOTAL 100

ADRC.NMIMS | PAGE 17
QUESTIONS?
CONTACT US.

ADRC @adrc.nmims
NMIMS kpmsol.adrcommittee@gmail.com