First of all, I want to apologize for the late post. I've been I'll these past couple of days, and had vertigo, so I really could not read, much less write. Hopefully I'll be good to go by Wednesday.
I really enjoyed Chapters 14 and 19 because it put words to what several of us have conceptualized about oral arguments over the years. The most important point, at least for me, out of chapter 14 was "STRUCTURE STRUCTURE STRUCTURE." Having a simple narration that conveys your arguments effectively is key to making a good opening argument.
The chapter mentions that each attorney can use an outline that provides them with enough detail to allow them to look at the arbitrators, and only look at their outline to make sure that they're hitting the key points. Being a reading/writing person, I know that just writing an outline will not do for me. I actually have to write down my whole argument, read it aloud to myself several times, and then create an outline from what I wrote. It may seem like extra work, but I think it makes it much easier for me to remember the necessary information. In the end though, everyone knows what works best for them.
The reading also pointed out things we may not have thought about before. For example, concerning your pace, it is better that you slow down or completely pause if the arbitrators are trying to locate a document you referred them to or they're writing alot. Also, you have to be aware of transnational communication issues, such as translation and the interpretation of your body language. Having done a little legal translation and interpretation in the past, I know that it is of great help to provide the translator/interpreter with the legal terms and points you will be discussing in your argument. Otherwise, your message might be lost in translation.
You also want to be credible, and to this end, many of us from the western countries like to look the arbitrators in the eye. However, the reading points out that other cultures might see this as a sign of disrespect. Obviously, this can make a HUGE difference to the credibility and acceptance of your argument.
I was surprised to learn that in arbitration, the closing arguments should not be a simple summary of your arguments. It should include information that reminds the arbitrators of specific facts which support specific arguments.
But I am left wondering, why are counsels given 2-3 weeks to submit their closing arguments if these are in writing? I don't see why it takes so long, considering they have all discussed the facts, evidence, and legal arguments already.
8 comments:
Hope you are feeling better!
Regarding the outline I completely agree with you that one has to be done or else you risk losing yourself in the things that are being said (especially after they ask you something) so you can always have a "yellow brick road" to follow.
Pausing during an oral argument is one of the most difficult things to do (for me, at least), but I definitely agree with what the authors said. If the arbitrators are looking for a document or writing something down they probably are not fully listening, especially if they are shuffling through stacks of paper. While pausing often seems awkward to me, the pauses in oral arguments I have observed have appeared quite natural. More over, the brief pause seemed to be appreciated by the listening panels.
It's good to hear the variety of method's people use to prepare to speak. Perhaps having a more detailed outline would be an asset and not just a crutch to read from if it helps in the preparation process and isn't just read from during oral argument. It's very interesting to consider the transnational communication issues and emphasizes to me that an international commercial arbitrator has to already be skilled at oral argument because they have even more things to watch out for (body language, translation issues, pausing to allow the panel to catch up).
Hope you feel better.
I found the information on closing arguments interesting too. It made me wonder whether we actually even need to do them in arbitration!
Agreed that the opening statement chapter was particularly useful. I think that the Tone, Pace, Posture, and Demeanor section is something that inexperienced arbitrators can really focus on (at least I know it's something I need help in!).
hope you feel better!
I've been using your method: write absolutely everything down and than begin slowly outlining
The thing that leaped out at me was "preparation preparation preparation" - but it sounds like you do that en route to making your structured outline!
On the look-in-the-eye thing, I wonder how that works out with Japanese and Chinese cultures (random thought I guess)...
I think the whole written closing statement seems a bit silly, especially considering how you're sort of reemphasising some things and dragging on the process as a whole.
@ Tim: Whenever I go back home, I have to sort of change my demeanour when interacting with older people, especially men. Prolonged eye contact is a definite no-no.
Post a Comment