Vis Moot Court team excels at Harvard Law School Vis Pre-Moot Competition

2025 Vis Team

The CWRU Vis Moot Court Team recently competed at the Harvard Law School Vis Pre-Moot Competition in preparation for the most recognized moot competition in the world, the Willem C. Vis Moot. 

After competing against the University of Hamburg, Bucerius Law School, the University of Turku, Aarhus University and LMU Munich, the CWRU team was one of two teams selected to advance to the grand final. After competing against reigning Vis world champion Bucerius in the final round, CWRU was awarded second place in the Harvard Vis Moot. Furthermore, CWRU won two of the three speaking awards at the competition, with 2L Daniel Radigan taking home the award for Best Individual Oralist, and 1L Ashley Nelson being awarded 2nd Runner-Up for Best Individual Oralist. 

The team is made up of:

  • Jim FitzGibbon (3L, Captain)
  • Nathaniel Sommers (3L, Captain)
  • Joel Berg (2L)
  • Vanessa Pilatova (2L)
  • Matthew Matolka (2L)
  • Daniel Radigan (2L)
  • Ashley Nelson (1L)
  • Tara Czekner (1L)
  • Professor Eric Chaffee (Coach)
  • Professor Kathryn Mercer (Coach)

“The Harvard Pre-Moot was the highest level of competition that the CWRU team has participated in outside of Vienna in the team’s recent history,” noted 3L Captain Jim FitzGibbon. “Facing some of the best teams in the world, including a final match with the reigning world champion, CWRU’s team excelled. To have two first year members win two out of the three speaking awards at this competition is a testament to their excellence in oral advocacy. Moreover, the feedback provided by the excellent arbitrators at the competition provides us the chance to further perfect our arguments in advance of the main competition in Vienna later this year.”

3L Captain Nate Sommers further noted that “with the Harvard Pre-Moot under the team’s belt, we feel prepared not only to compete in Chicago and Vienna, but excel in both competitions.”

Professor Kathryn Mercer, the VIS Team co-coach said, “I am honored to be faculty coach and to have joined the CWRU VIS Arbitration team at the Harvard Law School VIS Pre-Moot of 2025. The team’s collective accomplishments at this pre-moot were well-deserved and due to their dedication to preparing and practicing for the competition. The leadership team, consisting of captains Jim FitzGibbon and Nate Sommers, has forged a path for more VIS team successes this semester at additional pre-moots and finally at the VIS Competition in Vienna.”

"The Vis Moot is as close as you can get to an international arbitration without actually participating in one," said professor Eric Chaffee. "It attracts groups of top students from the nation's leading academic institutions. The students from our institution have formed a cohesive team and done the work to prepare. I am not surprised that they did well at the competition. They definitely earned their success."

The Willem C. Vis International Arbitration Moot is the most recognized moot court competition in the world, with hundreds of teams from every continent arguing international arbitration case simulating a business dispute. While the final rounds are in Hong Kong or Vienna, Vis teams participate in pre-moots to hone their arguing skills and practice for the final rounds in April.

This year’s Vis Moot problem involves the breakdown of a contract between the Claimant, an energy supplier, and the Respondent, a government-owned power company. After Respondent attempted to exit the contract due to an election causing changes in its energy policy, Claimant is attempting to enforce the contract under its original terms. However, Respondent argues that Claimant has violated certain contractual obligations. The procedural aspects of the case involve a dispute over a mediation provision in the contract and the admission of two exhibits discussing the parties’ history of attempting settlement of the dispute. The substantive aspects of the case concern the applicability of the Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) to this dispute, including whether the contract falls under the CISG and whether the Parties’ validity excluded the CISG’s applicability.