If the prospect of standing in front of a judge and presenting a legal argument sounds intimidating, you’re not alone.
For many law students, participating in a moot can be an important step towards building those legal advocacy skills and gaining confidence in a courtroom. To prepare for a moot, law students spend months researching a legal problem and fine-tuning their arguments, with the support of their coaches, before presenting their case at a mock court hearing.
We spoke with three Allard Law students and recent grads who competed in upper-year moots this spring about what they learned from the experience. They say mooting helped them move beyond their notes and meaningfully engage with a judge – a skill that will stay with them throughout their legal careers.
Helen Yang - Harold G. Fox Moot
The Harold G. Fox Moot brings together teams from law schools across Canada to explore a legal problem focused on intellectual property law. Held each year in Toronto, the Fox Moot gives law students an opportunity to deepen their understanding of IP law and interact with jurists from the Supreme Court, the Ontario Court of Appeal, and the Federal Court, as well as experienced IP lawyers.
What was your favorite part of the mooting experience?
Helen: My favorite part was the moment when the argument became a conversation. At first, I saw mooting as something where I had to deliver my submissions perfectly. But the more we practiced, the more I realized that the best moments happened when I stopped clinging to the script and actually engaged with the bench.
The judges pushed us to explain how our arguments would work in practice, what consequences they would have and where the limits were. As someone interested in IP litigation, I found that very helpful. It made the law feel less like a set of abstract rules and more like a live problem we were trying to solve together.
What impact do you think mooting has had on your time at law school?
Helen: My mooting experience made law school feel much closer to practice. In a moot, everything happens at once: facts, law, policy, writing, strategy, professional judgment and communication under pressure. You have to know the cases, but you also have to decide what matters most and explain it in a way that is useful to the court.
The experience also helped me better understand my own advocacy style. I am not naturally the loudest person in the room, and mooting made me realize that I do not need to be. There is a different kind of strength in being prepared, calm and direct. It’s been one of the most meaningful parts of law school for me so far, not only because of the skills I developed, but because of the people I got to learn from.
Gurman Dhaliwal – Julius Alexander Isaac Moot
Held each year in Toronto, the Julius Alexander Isaac Moot focuses on issues of equity and diversity in law and encourages mooters to engage with themes grounded in critical race theory.
The Isaac Moot is organized by the Black Law Students’ Association of Canada and named after the late Chief Justice of the Federal Court, Julius Alexander Isaac, who was the first Black judge to sit on the Federal Court of Canada.
What inspired you to try out for the Julius Alexander Isaac Moot?
Gurman: The Isaac Moot focuses on criminal or public law, which means I got to think seriously about the arguments both Crown and defence counsel would raise. That balance really appealed to me because it required me to consider the law from multiple perspectives, while also thinking critically about how race, power and systemic inequality can shape legal decision making.
I also saw the moot as a chance to challenge myself outside of the classroom and develop as an advocate in an area of law that deeply interests me.
Why should law students consider participating in an upper-year moot?
Gurman: It’s one of the best ways to build confidence in both written and oral advocacy. Mooting pushes you to work through a legal problem in a much deeper way than you usually do in class, while learning how to respond to questions under pressure.
You learn how to think on your feet, refine your arguments and get a small glimpse of what courtroom advocacy feels like. It’s also a great way to connect with students from other Canadian law schools and feel part of a broader legal community.
Zack Currie – Peter Burns Mock Trial Competition
In the Peter Burns Moot, students compete in teams of two in a mock criminal trial, giving them the opportunity to build trial advocacy skills like cross-examination and raising objections. The winning team goes on to compete in the Western Canada Moot Competition (the MacIntyre Cup). From there, the first- and second-place teams get to compete in the National Trial Moot Competition (the Sopinka Cup).
This year, Allard Law’s Zack Currie and Gunreet Sethi advanced all the way to the Sopinka Cup finals in Ottawa.
Your team made it to the Sopinka Cup, where you were named Best Overall Advocate. How did that feel? And what was your strategy?
Zack: Winning Best Overall Advocate in Ottawa and placing second nationally was an incredible finale to this competition. I think a big part of our success came down to a simple strategy: treat the trial as a live conversation.
In a moot, the witnesses have a fact pattern, but they react like real people: they pivot, make mistakes on their facts and throw curveballs at you. Rather than clinging to our previous ideas and outlines, my co-counsel and I leaned into the unpredictability. Because we knew our materials inside and out, we felt comfortable adapting when necessary, using the witnesses’ words and demonstrating that we were truly listening.
What impact do you think mooting might have on your future career?
Zack: I’m looking at a future in criminal law, and mooting gave me a taste of the actual mechanics of litigation and offered a safe, zero-stakes environment to make mistakes. Actually being in the courtroom for our practices completely demystified the natural intimidation factor of the space, and I think it will leave me feeling much more at home when I step back in there as counsel.
Learning from such a diverse group of practitioners, coaches and other students also showed me that while litigation is adversarial, the legal profession is deeply connected and committed to mentorship. I’ll continue to seek out those connections and mentorship possibilities as I move forward in my career.
