If you’re reading this, chances are you’ve either signed up for a moot court competition or are thinking about it. First of all, great decision! Mooting is one of the best experiences law school can offer. But let’s be honest—the memorial can feel like the scariest part.
Moot court is often called the “mock courtroom” of law school—but if you’ve done even one, you know there’s nothing mock about the workload. Especially when it comes to preparing that 25–35 page beast called the memorial.
Now, you don’t need to be a legal writing wizard to draft a great memorial. You just need clarity, structure, teamwork, and a little bit of insider know-how. So here’s a practical, step-by-step guide to help you write a memorial that works—and maybe even wins.
Start With the Basics: Read the Moot Proposition Like a Lawyer
Before you open any law books, read the moot problem carefully. And then read it again.
Look for:
- Jurisdiction (Domestic or International?)
- Nature of the case (Civil? Criminal? Constitutional?)
- Laws involved (IPC, Constitution, Contract Act, or international conventions?)
- Timeline (What happened when?)
- Who’s who? (Petitioner/Appellant vs. Respondent)
Example: Let’s say the problem is about a social media platform banning a user based on ‘hate speech’. Instinct says it’s about freedom of speech. But is it Article 19(1)(a)? Is the platform state-owned? Is the writ maintainable?
Tip: Start building your case theory early. If you’re the Petitioner, ask yourself: What do we want, and on what grounds can we win it?
Divide Work, But Don’t Disappear
A memorial has many parts: Facts, Issues, Summary of Arguments, Arguments Advanced, Prayer, Citations. If you’re a team of three, divide smartly. But avoid the classic trap: “I’m doing only research,” or “I’ll just edit at the end.”
Why?
Because a strong memorial is not stitched—it’s built together. All parts need to speak the same language, and that only happens when everyone understands the flow.
Structure First, Style Later
Each moot will have formatting rules: font size, margins, citation style, page limit. Follow them like your life depends on it.
Here’s a typical structure:
Cover Page: Includes party name, role (Petitioner/Respondent), and other details.
Table of Contents: Neat and accurate. Helps the judge navigate quickly.
List of Abbreviations: Keep it short—use only what’s necessary.
Index of Authorities: Cite all statutes, cases, books, etc., with page references.
Statement of Jurisdiction: Tell the court why it can hear the case.
Illustration: “The Hon’ble Supreme Court has jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution of India as the matter pertains to a violation of fundamental rights.”
Statement of Facts: This should be neutral, not argumentative. Just the relevant facts in a clear, readable way.
Don’t write: “The biased Respondents illegally detained the Petitioner.”
Do write: “The Petitioner was detained on March 5, 2024, under the provisions of the UAPA.”
Issues Raised: Frame 3–4 precise, legal questions.
Example:
- Whether the actions of the Respondent violate the Petitioner’s right to freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a)?
- Whether the platform qualifies as ‘State’ under Article 12?
Summary of Arguments: Think of this as a trailer. One paragraph per issue. Show your logic and flow without diving into details.
Arguments Advanced: This is the heart of your memorial. More on this below.
Prayer: Simple and clear. Don’t overcomplicate.
Example: “In light of the above, the Petitioner respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Court may declare the detention as unconstitutional and direct immediate release.”
Crafting Killer Arguments (Advanced Section)
This part needs your best research, writing, and logic. Each issue should be argued like this:
(i) Heading/Subheadings
Use headings that make your point.
“The Detention Violates Article 21 and Lacks Due Process.”
(ii) Start With Law
Quote the relevant statute or constitutional article. Always.
(iii) Apply Facts
Don’t dump cases. Apply them. Show how this case is like that case.
Example: In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that any restriction must be just, fair, and reasonable. In the present case, no hearing was granted to the Petitioner before the ban was imposed.
(iv) Structure of Each Argument
- Claim: What are you arguing?
- Law: What supports that claim?
- Application: How does it apply to your facts?
- Conclusion: What should the court decide?
Tip: Use simple sentences. Judges have read 20 memorials before yours. Be kind.
Sources Matter: Case Law, Commentary, and Common Sense
Use landmark cases first, then expand.
Example: “K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India” for privacy,
“Shreya Singhal v. Union of India” for online speech,
“Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala” for basic structure.
Foreign cases? Only if your jurisdiction allows it. Cite carefully.
Books, journals, blogs? Use authoritative ones. Avoid over-reliance on random websites. SCC, AIR, Halsbury’s, Indian Kanoon (with caution), etc., are safe bets.
Language Tips: Be Professional, Not Robotic
Avoid overusing phrases like:
- “It is humbly submitted that…” (Use once or twice, not ten times!)
- “It is crystal clear…” (Let the logic make it clear.)
- “The Petitioner vehemently contends…” (Relax. Your points should show strength, not your adjectives.)
Instead, write like this:
“The ban imposed on the Petitioner, without prior notice or hearing, violates established principles of natural justice.”
Citation Style: IRAC + Footnotes
Most moots follow Bluebook or OSCOLA citation. Use footnotes, not endnotes.
Stick to one format throughout. Get a free reference manager like Zotero if needed, or check out citation tools like Lawcite.
Review, Edit, Proofread (Then Proofread Again)
You will miss typos the first time. That’s normal.
Checklist before submission:
- Spelling and grammar
- Page numbers match TOC
- Citations complete and consistent
- No overlap or contradictions between sections
- Formatting rules followed
Ask a friend (outside your team) to read it once. Fresh eyes catch old mistakes.
Bonus: The ‘Wow’ Factor
Want to stand out? Add:
- Flowcharts or timelines (if allowed)
- Clear roadmap at the start of each argument
- Concise language with punchy transitions
- Tables of comparison (for cases/statutes)
Final Thoughts
Preparing a moot memorial is hard work—but it’s also a masterclass in legal writing, logic, and team collaboration. It will test your patience, your ability to argue, and sometimes your sleep cycle. But when you finally hold that crisp memorial in hand—and then kill it in the oral rounds—it’s absolutely worth it.
So take it one section at a time, support each other, and write like you believe in your client.
You’ve got this.
Ready to Level Up Your Moot Game?
If you’re serious about excelling in moots, whether it’s writing a brilliant memorial, acing oral rounds, or understanding courtroom strategy inside out Lawctopus Law School’s Moot Court Course & Competition is tailor-made for you.
Designed by top mooters and mentored by experienced professionals, this course takes you from the basics to advanced strategies with hands-on assignments, sample memorials, recorded demos, and feedback-based learning.
