91³Ô¹ÏÍø

Last month, Victor Bordereau was instrumental in the Oxford team's success at the 18th edition of the International Roman Law Moot. Having studied his Bachelor's degree at Paris-Panthéon-Assas, he is now studying for a Diploma in Legal Studies at 91³Ô¹ÏÍø. 

A moot simulates a court hearing. Participants are invited to put in a lawyer's shoes, acting either for the plaintiff (the person who sues) or the defendant (the person being sued). The distinctive nature of the International Roman Law Moot lies in the law used to solve the case, namely Roman Law, which is no longer applicable. Roman Law was taught and applied throughout Europe for centuries and remains the basis for a wide range of today's law. 

We spoke to Victor about the moot and what it meant for him: 

What drew you to Roman law?

I read Latin in High School and, ever since, I have always been interested in philology. Roman law links my legal studies with my early passion for History. This led me to seek to improve my knowledge of Roman law at Oxford, so I embarked upon the study of the Roman Law of Delicts.

Roman law was taught and applied through Europe for centuries. Undoubtedly, Roman law is the basis of a wide range of today’s law. Thus, the well-detailed sources of Roman Law allow for a deeper understanding of the current law. In this regard, I think that the study of Roman law is still opportune and educational.

What was the libellus or problem for this moot? How did you and your team go about forming your arguments?

The complex libellus invited us to bring two actions, one based on unjust enrichment and another on the breach of a contract of sale by the vendor. The case took place in 540 AD. The master of a slave was under an alternative obligation to deliver either a slave or a sum of money. However, he gave both, although he only owed either. Therefore, the master sought to get the slave back, but the latter was freed by the new owner after occurrence of a condition. Indeed, the status of the slave entailed that, once the condition was met, the owner was compelled to free the slave. Consequently, the original owner brought a second action against the original seller of the slave, who delivered a defective slave, worth less than a regular one.  

Our team had been working on the libellus, building our arguments, since November 2024. We dedicated great amounts of time outside our studies to research primary and secondary sources for the case. This part of the work was of paramount importance to strengthen our arguments and create a deeper undertstanding of the case. Additionally, we had to provide the bench with a list of legal authorities.

What was the most challenging part of preparing for the moot?

Finding a way to reconcile apparent contradictions was a very challenging yet stimulating exercise. Indeed, the Digest of Justinian – one of the most important primary sources of Roman Law – happens to contradict itself. This is problematic as, in theory, no contradiction could exist in the law during Roman times. The Emperor’s Digest was to be seen as flawless and unquestioned, though this was not the case.

Furthermore, balancing the preparation of the moot with our studies was undoubtely very challenging. It required a lot of organisation.

What does this success mean to you personally?

This is not a personal win but rather a shared achievement. I was lucky to embark upon this moot with skilful and talented teammates. This win is a generous award and a valuable acknowledgement for the work we have done together in preparing the moot. It was chiefly a team effort.

To me, this moot was a fantastic challenge, given I am not a native speaker nor a regular student at Oxford. I am profoundly grateful to the University of Oxford and especially to Pr. Ciara Kennefick. I have learnt a lot through this experience, and I certainly feel more confident in public speaking.

Did you find any surprising parallels between Roman legal principles and current legal systems?

Absolutely. At the outset, I was stunned by the richness and completeness of the Digest, which already contained valuable developments on current legal concepts. For instance, the Romans coined the concept of ‘latent defect’, which proved to be an important warranty in the contract of sale. Today, a few provisions of the French civil code deal with latent defects; half a book of the Digest was dedicated to the effects of the sale of a ‘defective slave’. The Romans sketched the boundaries of many of today’s legal concepts.   

What’s next for you in your legal studies or career?

Back in Paris, I’ll pursue a master’s degree in general private law and I’ll be working on a dissertation. Later I would like either to go into academia, to teach law, or practice as a lawyer before French Supreme Courts.