How to Draft a Good Memorial

A memorial is a written submission to the judges. It must be clear enough that a tired judge, reading at night, understands your case in one pass. The best memorials are not the ones with the most sources. They are the ones where every page is easy to follow and every claim is proved.

What judges look for

• Clear structure. Headings that tell the story.
• Correct law. Accurate rules, accurate sources.
• Good use of authority. Strong sources, with pinpoints, used for a reason.
• Application to the facts. Not only “what the law is”, but “why we win on these facts”.
• Persuasion and fairness. Confident, not exaggerated. Honest about the other side’s best point.
• Polish. Clean language, correct citations, no typing errors, rules followed exactly.

The standard memorial structure

Names and order differ from moot to moot, so follow your own rules exactly. Most memorials look like this:

Part	What goes in it	Tips
Cover page	Court, case name, side, team code	Follow anonymity rules strictly. No school names if the rules ban them
Table of contents	All headings with page numbers	Use automatic headings so it updates
Index of authorities	List of every treaty, case and book you cite, with where it appears	Group by type (treaties, cases, books, articles)
Statement of jurisdiction	Why the court can hear the case	Short, formal, based on the problem’s documents
Questions presented / Issues	The legal questions, in neutral or lightly favorable words	Keep to the problem’s wording
Statement of facts	The story, briefly	Write it in a slightly biased tone
Summary of pleadings	One-page map of your arguments	Write it last
Pleadings (arguments)	The body: your argument for each issue	80 percent of your marks live here
Prayer for relief	Exactly what you ask the court to declare or order	Be specific and match your arguments

In Vis, the document is called a memorandum and may include a procedural section. In some moots, jurisdiction is part of the issues. Check the rules.

The drafting process (do it in this order)

Phase	Work	Output
1	Issue outline: headings only	A one-page skeleton
2	Source mapping: attach authorities to each heading	Source log linked to the outline
3	First draft per issue, one writer per issue	Rough paragraphs
4	Team review: each person reads and marks another’s issue	Comments
5	Second draft: fix logic, add pinpoints, delete weak points	Clean draft
6	Style pass: one editor reads the whole memorial for voice, grammar and consistency	Final text
7	Check list (Part 7)	Ready to upload

Draft the Pleadings first. Write the facts, summary and prayer after, once you know what you argue.

Headings: the secret weapon

A judge should be able to read only your headings and understand your whole case. That means headings are full sentences that make a claim, not labels.

Formula:

[Subject] + [action or status] + [because / under legal reason].

Weak (label)	Strong (claim)
Jurisdiction	I. THE COURT HAS JURISDICTION BECAUSE BOTH STATES ACCEPTED IT IN THE RUPA WATER TREATY
Breach	II. ULKA BREACHED ARTICLE 4 BY REDUCING THE DRY-SEASON FLOW BELOW 40%
Notice	A. Ulka’s email was not valid “written notice” under Article 12
Remedy	III. TORSA IS ENTITLED TO RESTITUTION AND COMPENSATION

Use a clear numbering system: I, A, 1, a. Do not go deeper than four levels.

Statement of facts

• Keep it short (often one to two pages). Include the facts your arguments use, and the key adverse facts.
• Put them in order of time or in order of issue.
• Give the paragraph number of the problem after each fact, for example (Moot Problem, ¶ 7).
• Never add or change a fact. You may choose which true facts to stress and describe them in a favorable but honest way.
• Do not argue in the facts. Save argument for the Pleadings.

Example:

Neutral: “Ulka reduced the flow of the Rupa River in March 2024.”

Fair and favourable (Torsa): “In March 2024, without warning, Ulka completed the Ulka Dam and held back the river’s dry-season flow.” (¶ 9)

Check the second sentence: is “without warning” true? If the facts say Ulka sent a warning, do not write it.

Summary of pleadings

One page, one short paragraph for each issue. Each paragraph says: our claim, plus the two or three reasons. Use the same words as your headings. Write it last, after the Pleadings are final.

How to write one good paragraph

1. Topic sentence: the claim in one line.
2. Rule: the law, with source and pinpoint.
3. Reason / support: why the rule means this (case, treaty text, logic).
4. Application: how it fits OUR facts.
5. Link: why this helps the final result.

Weak paragraph:

It is humbly submitted that it is pertinent to note that water is very important for life and the Respondent has acted in a manner which is shocking and against all notions of justice. Many cases say harm is bad.

Strong paragraph:

Ulka’s dam breached the duty not to cause significant transboundary harm. A State must use all means at its disposal to avoid activities in its territory that cause significant damage to another State (Pulp Mills, [101]). Ulka held back the dry-season flow, and salt water then reached Torsa’s southern farms (¶ 10). Torsa lost crops it had grown for years. The harm is significant, and Ulka caused it.

The strong version is shorter, has a claim, a rule, a pinpoint, facts and a conclusion. (Check pinpoints before using any example in real work.)

Writing rules for plain, strong English

• Short sentences. Aim for under 25 words. One idea per sentence, one topic per paragraph.
• Active voice. “Ulka breached Article 4” is stronger than “Article 4 was breached by Ulka”.
• Plain words. “Use” not “utilize”. “Because” not “owing to the fact that”.
• Cut empty phrases. “It is pertinent to note that”, “it is a settled position that”, “it is most respectfully and humbly submitted”. Use “It is submitted that” only where it helps, once per paragraph at most.
• Show, do not shout. Do not call the other side’s case “absurd”, “ridiculous” or “shocking”. Prove the reason why it fails and let the judge reach that view.
• Define special words once. After “the Treaty”, always use “the Treaty”.
• Do not say “I think” or “we feel”. Say “Ulka submits” or “It is submitted”.
• Write like you speak to a respected teacher. Formal, but easy to read.

Many law students learn long, old-style sentences from court judgments and pleadings. They are not needed in a moot memorial. If a sentence runs more than three lines, split it. If a word makes you sound “more legal” but does not add meaning, delete it.

Use authorities with purpose

• Cite the strongest source first.
• Give a pinpoint every time.
• Use short quotes only where the exact words matter. Otherwise, paraphrase.
• Do not drown a paragraph in citations. Three good ones beat eight average ones.
• Deal with bad authority openly. If a leading case is against you, say so and explain why it does not apply or why it is wrong. Judges trust teams who do not hide it.
• Never cite a case for something the judge did not actually say. Reread the paragraph before you write the footnote.

Citation style: examples

Use the style your rules require (often OSCOLA or Bluebook). If they allow any style, choose one and use it everywhere. Examples:

Source	OSCOLA style	Bluebook style
ICJ judgment	Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) (Judgment) [1997] ICJ Rep 7, [140]	Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hung./Slovk.), Judgment, 1997 I.C.J. 7, ¶ 140 (Sept. 25)
Treaty	Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (adopted 23 May 1969, entered into force 27 January 1980) 1155 UNTS 331, art 31	Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties art. 31, May 23, 1969, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331
ILC Articles	ILC, ‘Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts’ (2001) UN Doc A/56/10, art 2	Int’l L. Comm’n, Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, art. 2 (2001)

Memorial length: moots with short skeletons

Some domestic and internal moots ask for a short “skeleton” of 1 to 6 pages instead of a memorial of 20 to 40 pages. A skeleton is a frame for your oral argument. Use numbered paragraphs, bold headings, and the authority with pinpoint in brackets. Short skeletons give the claim and the steps. Longer ones also give the reasoning. The size of the space tells you how much detail the judges expect.

The “can a friend explain it back?” test

Give your near-final memorial to a friend who is not in the moot. Ask them to explain your argument in their own words after reading one issue. If they get it wrong, the fault is in your writing, not in their reading. Rewrite that part.

What makes a best memorial

• A clear theory of the case that runs through every issue.
• Headings that tell the story on their own.
• Facts that are accurate and cited to the problem.
• Strong sources with exact pinpoints, used to prove a point.
• Application to this case in every paragraph.
• Honest treatment of the other side’s best argument.
• Careful, consistent style and zero careless errors.