Support for the Intercollegiate Negotiation Competition

The Sumitomo Group Public Affairs Committee strives to support university students’ negotiation skills, assist in upgrading higher education, and contribute to global human resources development through the Intercollegiate Negotiation Competition.

Intercollegiate Negotiation Competition website

23rd (2024) Intercollegiate Negotiation Competition

On November 16 and 17, 2024, the 23rd Intercollegiate Negotiation Competition (INC) took place at Sophia University in Tokyo.

With 36 teams competing in Japanese and 28 in English, there were 279 contestants in all. 20 Japanese universities participated: Hokkaido University, Tohoku University, the University of Tokyo, Waseda University, Meiji University, Sophia University, Chuo University, Gakushuin University, Nihon University, Rikkyo University, Tsukuba University, Keio University, Hitotsubashi University, Nagoya University, Kyoto University, Doshisha University, Ritsumeikan University, Osaka University, Kyushu University, and Seinan Gakuin University. Nine teams participated from overseas: Team Australia, the National University of Singapore, the National University of Mongolia, SolBridge International School of Business, Peking University School of Transnational Law, George Mason University Korea Campus, Temple University Japan Campus, Government Law College Mumbai, and Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University.

Tournament chart

<Japanese>

Round A / arbitration Round B / negotiation
Red Blue Red Blue
1 Rikkyo J1 Tohoku J1 Singapore J1 Ritsumeikan J1
2 Waseda J1 Meiji J2 Sophia J3 Kyusyu J1
3 Gakushuin J1 Hitotsubashi J1 Waseda J1 Kyoto J1
4 Tokyo J2 Osaka J1 Doshisha J2 Hitotsubashi J2
5 Sophia J1 Meiji J1 Sophia J2 Osaka J2
6 Gakushuin J2 Kyusyu J1 Rikkyo J1 Osaka J1
7 Nihon J1 Kyoto J1 Tokyo J2 Meiji J3
8 Tokyo J1 Kyusyu J2 Gakushuin J2 Chuo J1
9 Singapore J1 Hitotsubashi J2 Waseda J2 Kyusyu J2
10 Sophia J3 Kyoto J2 Doshisha J1 Meiji J1
11 Rikkyo J3 Hitotsubashi J3 Tokyo J1 Hitotsubashi J3
12 Doshisha J2 Osaka J2 Nihon J1 Tohoku J1
13 Sophia J2 Chuo J2 Rikkyo J2 Kyoto J2
14 SeinanGakuin J1 Meiji J3 SeinanGakuin J1 Chuo J2
15 Rikkyo J2 Ritsumeikan J1 Hokkaido J1 Tsukuba J1
16 Hokkaido J1 Mongolia J1 Rikkyo J3 Meiji J2
17 Doshisha J1 Tsukuba J1 Sophia J1 Hitotsubashi J1
18 Waseda J2 Chuo J1 Gakushuin J1 Mongolia J1

<English>

Round A / arbitration Round B / negotiation
Red Blue Red Blue
1 Singapore E1 Chuo E1 Solbridge E1 Chuo E1
2 GLCMumbai E1 Nagoya E1 GLCMumbai E1 Chuo E2
3 Rikkyo E2 George Mason University, Korea Campus E1 Singapore E2 Meiji E1
4 Peking E1 Nagoya E2 Temple E2 Hitotsubashi E1
5 Temple E2 Mongolia E1 Rikkyo E2 Keio E1
6 Waseda E1 Hitotsubashi E1 Singapore E1 Nagoya E1
7 Tokyo E2 Team Australia E1 Tokyo E1 Nagoya E2
8 GLCMumbai E2 Meiji E1 GLCMumbai E2 Ritsumeikan E1
9 Singapore E2 Keio E1 Rikkyo E1 Kyusyu E1
10 Sophia E1 Team Australia E2 Peking E1 Team Australia E1
11 Rikkyo E1 Chuo E2 Waseda E1 Team Australia E2
12 Temple E1 Ritsumeikan E1 Sophia E1 Mongolia E1
13 Solbridge E1 Kyusyu E1 Temple E1 Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha E1
14 Tokyo E1 Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha E1 Tokyo E2 George Mason University, Korea Campus E1

Problems and the Competition Outline

The competition has two parts, Round A devoted to arbitration and Round B to negotiation, with Japanese and English divisions for each part. In both rounds, the theme was breach of obligations under a contract between Red Museum, which is a national institution with a long history, and Blue, Inc., a company involved in urban development, large-scale facility construction, real estate leasing, and the operation of commercial and resort facilities. The arbitration and negotiation concerned construction of a new museum wing and the loan of artworks for an exhibition. The teams took on the roles of either Red or Blue.

The issues to be arbitrated in Round A were 1) the New Wing Case and 2) the Orange Collection Case.
The New Wing Case was about a serious incident in an exhibition room of the New Wing of the Red Museum, which occurred after the handover and opening of the new wing. The construction of the new wing was contracted to Blue. There are four issues to be considered.

 1) Did Blue breach its obligations?:
  Room temperatures in a gallery of the
  new wing rose sharply and humidity
  levels greatly exceeded the design
  standards. According to the evaluation
  report by the external experts engaged by
  Red, discrepancies between the design
  documents and the actual
  placement of
  sensors and piping may have been the
  cause.
 2) If Blue breached its obligation, how much
  compensation should Blue pay?:
  Ten paintings were damaged.
 3) Is Red obligated to pay USD 200,000 to
  Blue?:
  Blue has spent USD 200,000 to repair the
  new wing. Blue claims that it should be
  borne by Red.
 4) Should the arbitration proceedings be
  suspended? Should the decision by the
  technical expert agreed upon by both
  parties be used as the basis for the
  arbitration process?

On the other hand, regarding the Orange Collection Case, Red asked Blue to acquire the “Orange Collection,” having concluded an agreement granting Blue an exclusive agency right representing Red. However, Red acquired certain pieces through Green and the rest of the pieces directly. There were two issues.

 1) Did Red breach its obligations?:
  It needs to be determined whether the
  exception clause to the exclusive agency
  applies.
 2) If Red breached its obligations, how much
  compensation should Red pay?:

The teams acted as attorneys representing either Red or Blue, stating their claims in the presence of the arbitrators whose roles were played by the judges.

In Round B, the teams negotiated the following two points, assuming that the New Wing Case exists but has not undergone arbitration, and that the Orange Collection Case does not exist.

 1) How to resolve the New Wing Case
  through negotiation
 2) The terms for the loan of the 12 artworks
  owned by Blue to Red

Judges and Officials

Over the two days, a total of 143 people, including legal professionals, academics, and corporate legal staff, extended cooperation to INC by serving as judges. Some matches were held in a hybrid format with certain judges participating online. INC alumni supported INC as officials in charge of reception, other arrangements, and the matches.

Results of the 23rd INC

The awards ceremony always has an element of high drama. On the one hand, there is the delight of the winning team, and on the other hand, the disappointment of the runners-up. The drama attests to the contestants’ commitment and enthusiasm. Team Australia received the first prize as well as the Best Teamwork Award. The teams with the highest scores in the competition in Japanese were Osaka University for arbitration and Sophia University for negotiation. In the competition in English, Team Australia had the highest scores for both arbitration and negotiation.

Shuichi Nagasawa, Sumitomo Group Public Affairs Committee Executive Director
Sumitomo Cup presented to Team Australia
Team Australia, the winners of the first prize

Results

1st prize Team Australia 227.25 points
2nd prize Sophia University 210 points
3rd prize National University of Singapore 209.8333 points
4th prize The University of Tokyo 208.5 points
5th prize Osaka University 204 points
6th prize Nihon University 201 points
6th prize George Mason University, Korea Campus 201 points
8th prize Meiji University 200 points
9th prize Kyushu University 199.8333 points
10th prize Chuo University 199 points

Awards by Category

Best Teamwork Award Team Australia
Highest score for the competition in Japanese for arbitration Osaka University
Highest score for the competition in Japanese for negotiation Sophia University
Highest score for the competition in English for arbitration Team Australia
Highest score for the competition in English for negotiation Team Australia

Results for the competition in Japanese

1st prize The University of Tokyo
2nd prize Sophia University
3rd prize Osaka University
4th prize Nihon University
5th prize Seinan Gakuin University

Results for the competition in English

1st prize Team Australia
2nd prize National University of Singapore
3rd prize Sophia University
4th prize Meiji University
5th prize The University of Tokyo

PageTop