【GDUFS STORY】The Journey to CIETAC Champion

The Willem C. Vis International Commercial Arbitration Moot (Vis Moot) is an international moot court competition in memory of the late Willem C. Vis, a famous expert in international commercial law. Since 1993, it has been held annually in Vienna. The sponsor will put the problem (usually about the Contract and Correspondence case) on their website. The competitors are undergraduates and the postgraduates studying Law. They need to submit Memorandum for Claimant and Memorandum for Respondent in written form for the moot. And they will use the written material in the oral argument phase, speaking English. The argument should be subjected to the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (hereafterCISG). The object of the Vis Moot is to foster study in the areas of international commercial and arbitration laws, promoteCISG and encourage the resolution of business disputes by arbitration. Since 2000, China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) has held the relevant competition in China at the end of every year, which is referred to CIETAC International Commercial Arbitration Moot (CIETAC). The champion team will be supported to participate in the Vis Moot in Vienna by CIETAC.

 

Encourage participation, select the best

In September, 2002, the School of Legal Studies of GDUFS received an invitation to take part in the third annual CIETAC International Commercial Arbitration Moot in that November in Beijing. I, Dean of the School of Legal Studies at that time, was very excited after reading the invitation, and I wrote in the blank of the invitation letter as follows, “Distinguishedleaders of the school, this is a good opportunity to display the strength of the School of Legal Studies. Please give us the permission to form a team and participate.”

 

The delegation of GDUFS in Vienna (left to right: Zhao Yunfei, WU Xingguang ,WANG Xin, CAI Hong, LU Ming)

 

XU Zhenghua, the former party secretary and president approved her request quickly. And the Partyandpoliticsleaders of the School of Legal Studies paid high attention to this and decided to organize a competition between the class and grade, so as to select thebestofthebest to participate in the CIETAC held in Beijing. Considering that the MA in Legal English from the School of English for International Business was transferredfrom the School of Legal Studies, it can be seen as co-built by both schools. The decision to select students from this MA as well was made in an officemeeting. Teacher CAI Hong acted as coach who was in charge of the relevant work. MONG Dehong, Secretary of CPC General Branch in our college, and HU Wengtao, Deputy Secretary, tried their best to support us. Limited byspace, I will not go into the details.

 

To make students familiar with International arbitration rules, I asked Teacher CAI to compile and print two handouts which were mostly in English. We gave it out to students for free and it was disseminated among them. A boom to study international commercial and arbitration laws emerged among students. Many students study arbitration rules in English from early morning. And after class, they would discuss cases or practice for the debate. In the competition between the classes and grade, every party tried their best to win. The selection competition was really splendid. The final was held in a theatre. The team of the 1999 class and the team of postgraduates debated furiously and the latter took the first place in the end. Teacher CAI gave her remark on the competition and CHEN Jianping, Vice President, summed-up enthusiastically in English and praised every member for their proficiency in law and English. He also pointed out that this activity had fostered study in law and English, and encouraged them to embrace the challenges bravely. Actually, this activity had started a boom of learning and had some practical effects, which were no less significant than winning.

 

After prudent discussion, we chose three members to participate in the competition in Beijing. And they were: WANG Xin, a graduate student; ZHAO Yunfei, a student who entered the school in 1999; Lu Ming, a student who entered the school in 2000. I was made leader because I was teaching International commercial law and was familiar with the relevant law used in the competition. As the fund was limited, Teacher CAI, the adviser, didn’t come with us.

 

The dark horse, who surprised others greatly

In mid-November, 2002, the 3rd CIETAC was held in Beijing. After a 36-hour train trip, the three member threw themselves into the preparation immediately, having no time to go sightseeing. The fact is that they had prepared earnestly since we got the invitation. During the trip, they were still discussing the key points and details on the train. And they would also observe the performance of other competitors so as to improve their own strategy.

 

The picture of the champion team of the 4th CIETAC in 2003 (left to right: ZHANG Lanlan, WANG Xin, LIN Lin, LU Ming)

 

The participants came from many famous universities at home. In the general round, our opponents were from Sun Yat-Sen University, University of International Business and Economics and Nankai University (NKU). And we came first in this round. In the quarters, our opponent was one prestigious university in home. Both of us made full use of our advantages to argue with each other. The argument was so fierce that it became a close match. Then the leaders were left alone and the chief arbitrator told us that GDUFS had won. The other leader was very emotional and lodgedaprotest. CHEN Deijun, chief arbitrator, was once the deputy director of International Economic and Trade Arbitration. He explained patiently that although two parties were matched in the proficiency of law, GDUFS was better in English. The other leader was not convinced and he wrote to the arbitrator an open letter with the signatures of several members, accusing – among other things – that the judgment was unfair. Some people even slandered us online, implying that we won that argument through bribes. To be honest, Financial Affairs Division only offered 5,000 RMB, which can just meet the expense of the transportation and accommodation. To eat delicious food, I also contacted my friends or fellow students to treat us to dinner many times. One of them was WANG Xuehua, director of a law office named Beijing Huanzhong and Partners. He had been the lawyer on the firstcaseofanti-dumpingin China (Newsprint Case) and has a strong command of CISG. During the dinner, he also gave us some constructive advice. Unlike us, another university who was much better funded and with more personnel (with 30,000 RMB and 8 members which included the financial personnel, regulars and substitutes) failed to enter the quarters. It was really a pity.

 

Our opponent in the finals was Nanjing University (NJU). On November 14th, the hall was crowded with the audience, including the media and competitors from other universities. Both sides debated in depth and gave legal analyses of the case under a tense atmosphere. At the same time, they would answer challenging inquiries addressed by three arbitrators. Two participants of our team this time were WANG Xin and ZHAO Yunfei; the former was quick-thinking, while the latter confident and composed, which left the audience with a lasting impression. After the argument, the chief arbitrator praised us for being prominent in the use of legal English, having a solid understanding of law and ability in case analysis. At last, we lost by a whisper and took second place.

 

After the competition, one Beijing newspaper reported that GDUFS was a dark horse, because its debate team, which was unknown before, achieved second the first time it participated.

 

Hone ourselves, make a breakthrough in Vienna

To cultivate students and search for a good way to develop legal talent, our college applied to form a team to participate in the Vis Moot in Vienna in April, 2003, with the budget being 80,000 RMB. President XU showed his support, but he demanded that the college itself should raise half of the money. I then contacted GUO Xiaowen, deputy director of CIETAC and director of its Shenzhen branch, and LIU Guoling, director of a law office, who was an internationaltrademajor at the original Guangzhou Institute of Foreign Trade. They showed their support and sponsored 20,000 RMB separately. As for the remaining amount, our university explored the possibility of sponsorship from import and export corporations. Guangdong Textiles IMP and EXP Co., Ltd also provided us with five tailored suits, which fitted well and were especially beautiful (as shown in the picture taken in Vienna).

 

With GDUFS’ permission, I was appointed by the school as the leader of the delegation, and Teacher CAI, the coach. As for the members, they were WANG Xin, ZHAO Yunfei and LU Ming. We prepared very hard for four months. We would study and discuss cases, clarify our thoughts, make strategies, compose and revise written Memorandum in our spare time. And it was common for us to work until midnight, with no exception for New Year’s Day in 2003.

 

There were many twists and turns in this Vienna trip. In March, 2003, just before we set off, SARS broke out in China and spread wildly in Guangzhou. The Chairman of the moot sent me an email and put forward that the participant must stay at home if infected with SARS. Therefore, we went to the main hospital for a health certificate. It was not until April 10th that the Austrian Embassy approved our visa application submitted in mid-March. Our GDUFS delegation of five members arrived in Vienna at 10 p.m. on April 11th, and it was already mid-night on the 12th when we came to the Chinese Embassy Hostels. It was three days later than planned and we even missed two activities of the opening ceremony.

 

Vis Moot consists of the written phrase and the oral hearing. Here, I want to express my appreciation to the distinguished Professor LIU Yiting, one of the founders of the School of Legal Studies at GDUFS, who contributed a lot to the written Memorandum. He often reviewed the written material and gave us a lot of constructive advice. The oral hearing started on April 12th and had four rounds in total. Our first game against the University of Ottawa was at 1 p.m. on April 13th, and our members still felt the effects of jetlag at that time. In the following three days, our opponents were from the University of Guatemala, Syracuse University and Sydney University of Technology. On the day before the competition, we always called a meeting and planned our strategy and tactics for the moot the next day.

 

Since it was the first time that our members had taken part in this international competition, they were not accustomed to the procedure. In Beijing, the opponent was the student of the other side, but in Vienna, the main opponent was the arbitrator. They would interrupt your statement and inquire some sharp questions as if they made difficulties for you on purpose, which was a great test to response.

 

The three members in our team were excellent in English, and were praised for their standard pronunciation by many arbitrators. One female teammember of Guatemala, who had argued with us, spoke highly of WANG Xin and said, “If I closed my eyes, I would think it was a BBC announcer speaking.” Besides, the second written material was praised as “Excellent English” by the judges.

 

In the international competition, our team no longer had an obvious advantage over others. The fact is that for most of the participants, English was their mother tongue. In the competition against Syracuse University, the other team made use of this advantage and speededup purposely. At first, our members could not understand them. It was not until later when they tried to grasp keywords that they adapted themselves and got through it. Teacher CAI, the coach, concentrated on the moot and gave advice to the members timely. Besides, she was also extremely considerate towards them in daily life.

 

We ranked 44 among 128 teams from 58 countries in this Vis Moot, which was really heartening. WANG Xin’s birthday was during this period coincidently. We bought a cake and beer that night and threw a party in the dining hall of the Chinese Embassy Hostels. I improvised a poem which read, “We are celebrating a birthday in a strange country, and teachers are on good terms with their students. The first battle focused on searching for a road, it is glorious whether we win or not.” Although it was important to get a high ranking, searching for a good way to develop International legal talent is more significant. This was the first time we participated in an international competition; nevertheless, we did an excellent job in these two aspects.

 

Persist and strive, come out first finally

On November 16th, 2003, the 4th CIETAC started in Beijing. The leader of our delegation was Doctor LI Yaofang (male) and the coach, lecturer LI Yan. President XU asked me the reason for the change in the leader and coach, and he thought that maybe it was better to keep it unchanged. I explained that it would take much time and energy to prepare for this competition and the people who participate may win honours. Therefore, it was better to change. As for the members, we kept WANG Xin, LU Ming who was still in school, and we added another two new members. They were ZHANG Lanlan, a student who entered GDUFS in 2000 and LIN Lin, who entered in 2001. As for ZHAO Yunfei, he had graduated from school by that time. On seeing WANG Xin being there, the leader of another university asked unhappily, “Are your team allowed to participate?” The thing was that the member of the team that had taken the first three places was not allowed to take part in again, according to the rule of Vis Moot in Vienna. However, there is no such rule in China. We made use of this rule and kept the two main members of the team that had taken the second place. What’s more? These two persons had participated in the International competition in Vienna. It was not a surprise that we came first in the end.

 

Our first opponent was ChinaUniversityofPoliticalScienceandLaw (CUPL). And WANG Xin and LIN Lin were the respondent party and had many advantages over the opponent. They were slightly better both in bearing and language. They convinced the arbitrator with essentialarguments,keeping smiling with composure and confidence.

 

The opponent in the afternoon was NKU. LU Ming and ZHANG Lanlan were the claimant party and the topic that year was not favourable to them. But they kept confident and argued with the other party calmly to the last second. Soon later, WANG Xin, ZHANG Lanlan and Teacher LI all fell ill as they were not accustomed to the climate of the new place. Teacher LI’s eyes wereinflamed and red, but she persevered in discussing with the team and still prepared dinner and fruits for them.

 

The competition in the morning of the 17th was against China Foreign Affairs University (CFAU). Both parties performed excellently and the arbitrator remarked that it was most splendid in the general round.

 

We were all excited when it was announced that GDUFS were entering the next round with the second best grade. The participants of CFAU sent congratulations to us, and so did we. Later, we drew lots to decide the opponent in the knockoutround. Our opponent turned out to be the strong Tsinghua University (THU). The night before, Doctor LI made LU Ming, who was previously the claimant party, act as the respondent party. It meant that he should change the position overnight. And he was only responsible for substantiveproblems before, so he was not good at solving procedural problems. It was really hard work for him. Fortunately, every member held together, sparing no effort to support him and helping him to clarifyhisthoughts. WANG Xin had always acted as the role of both sides. ZHANG Lanlan had difficulty in speaking at that time, but she still strived until midnight. Since victory was just around the corner, everyone was tired but happy.

 

The knockout began on the morning of the 20th. Doctor LI chose WANG Xin and LU Ming to participate and drew lots to decidetheir position. We matched with THU and it was a close game. All the participants in THU were female. One of them was under the weather and coughed a lot during the competition, which affected her performance. She was greatly touched and bowed her thanks when Doctor LI sent her some hot water. Finally, we won the powerful opponent by a whisper and entered the quarters.

 

At 1 p.m., we mettheformer champion NJU again. Since we lost to NJU in the previous finals, this could be seen as a battle for revenge. As we changed the strategy before, WANG Xin would focus on the substantiveproblem and LU Ming the procedural problem. The arbitrator put forward the procedural problem first and then the substantiveproblem. They alternated their answers with ease. The competition lasted for about half an hour and in the end the secretary general announced that GDUFS had won.

 

At 3 p.m., the hall was packed with the audience to watch the finals between CFAU and GDUFS. After four fierce competitions during a short period, we were all tired at that time. The chief arbitrator was Professor WEI from Renmin University of China (RUC). As a senior arbitrator, he came up with more sharp questions in the finals. Having accumulated experiences in the past competitions, both parties were familiar with these questions and took everything as it came. During the competition, the arbitrator asked WANG Xin a practical question to test her understanding of the execution of arbitraldecision. Then, WANG Xin talked with ease and fluency about the question and received recognition from Professor WEI who, in his comments, praised her for her quick response and said she was smart. Professor WEI thought the legal analysis of our party was a little better. Also, the optimism, confidence and the bearing of smiling in the competition left an lasting impression on the judge and the audience.

 

At 6 p.m., the Award Ceremony was held in the splendid banquet hall of the 21st Century Hotel. When Professor WEI announced that the champion went to GDUFS, all our members stood up and shook hands with the team of the CFAU who were sharing the same table with us. Their hearts were boundwith the warm applause as well as the joy and happiness of success. Later, the youngest member LIN Lincame to the stage and accepted theaward on behalf of our team. And WANG Xin also gave a speech as our representative. In the end of her speech, she used a sentence from our Vice President FANG Fanquan as conclusion, and it read as follows, “We come and we enjoy the process”. This is the sentence our Vice President FANG Fanquan said to encourage us the first time we went to Beijing to compete. Our members considered it classic, so every time before the competition, they would high five and shout, “Enjoy the process”. Well, it was our way to success to enjoy the process and takeiteasy. Enjoying the process means less fuss about the result but more attention to joy and personality elevation. Looking back on the whole journey, it all started in September, 2002 when we received the invitation and we took the second place in the 3rd CIETAC in November, 2002; we ranked 44 among 128 teams all over the world in April, 2003; step by step, we came first in the 4th CIETAC in November, 2003. It is no more than one year and two months, but our young fighters created a miracle and left a brilliant record regarding the student competition in the history of GDUFS.

 

The picture of the delegation and school leaders of GDUFS

 

On the evening of the 21st, gongs and drums beat and red flags were flown at the gate of GDUFS. On the two sides were hundreds of teachers and students who came to welcome the champion team. When interviewed by many media organisations, he said this brilliant victory showed that the idea and pattern of cultivating talents by “major and language” was correct.

 

The great victory of CIETAC encouraged both teachers and students who were busy in preparing for the assessment of Ministry of Education. It also threw some questions about how to carry out extracurricular learning activities and about how to enhance the schooling level, and so on.

 

Postscript: Where the participants are now

WANG Xin: Now, she is a lecturer in the School of English for International Business in GDUFS and teaches the curriculum of law in English, legal English and English debate. She is welcomed by students and has been invited to be the main judge of FLTRP National English Debating Competition and that of the open event of International Debate Education Association several times.

 

ZHAO Yunfei: She got her Master’s degree of Law from Michigan State University and is now working in Beijing. She is ahigh-ranking chief compliance officer of Legal Compliance Department in ABB (China) co., Ltd. She was once the legaladviser of Procter and GambleCompany and DuPontCompany.

 

LU Ming: He is one registered lawyer in New York, USA. Now he is a senior lawyer in the Hong Kong branch of King & Wood Mallesons, and he is in charge of thebusiness in overseas capital market.

 

ZHANG Lanlan: Now she is the senior tax manager of KPMG advisory (China) co., Ltd.

 

LIN Lin: she got her Master’s degree of Law and doctoral degree of Law from the NationalUniversityofSingapore. Now, she is the Assistant Professor in the School of Law in that university. She once worked in the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority as well as Singapore International Arbitration Center. From 2012 to 2013, she went to the Law School of Stanford University as a visiting scholar.