[blml] Breaking the Law (was why ask ?)

[Marvin French]

From: "Steve Willner"

> From: richard.hills at immi.gov.au
>
>  >Kaplan: The time to call the director is right
>  >at the moment that an opponent takes what may be
>  >an unusual action after receiving illegal
>  >information.
>
> As this was prior to the 1975 Laws, when L16A as we know it first
came
> into force, it doesn't seem very compelling for the present.  The
> footnote to the present Law states when the director is supposed
to be
> called, and I remember a later writing of Kaplan's when he gave
advice
> in accordance with the footnote.

Exactly right. The footnote says you call the Director when you have
evidence of an irregularity, not a mere suspicion. Why is this
footnote so widely ignored?

However, as Kaplan wrote in his Appeals Committee series
(1982-1984), there are times when an irregularity is so very obvious
that it is appropriate to call the Director immediately. E.g., a pro
opens a weak 2S and later bids 4S opposite a slow-passing client.
Perhaps Kaplan's reasoning was that  promptness will aid in
establishing the existence of UI, as the Director can do nothing at
this time but say "Play on."

Marv
Marvin L. French
San Diego, California
www.marvinfrench.com