[blml] Multiple infractions (was ...St. Louis) [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[richard.hills at immi.gov.au]

Sven Pran:

>This question was addressed by WBFLC in Paris November 1st:

[big snip]

Richard Hills:

Not quite.  The WBF LC minute stated that Law 64C applied
when both sides committed a revoke on the same trick.

But Law 64C specifically states that it only applies to
established revokes, and in such cases the Director awards
an assigned adjusted score.

Therefore, the WBF LC has not yet ruled on the issue of
whether or not LHO's withdrawn card is a penalty card if
both sides commit a NON-established revoke on the same
trick.

Or is Sven arguing, by analogy, that the Director must
immediately award an assigned adjusted score as soon as
both sides have committed a non-established revoke on the
same trick, contrary to the Law 62A mandate which requires
the correction of non-established revokes?


Best wishes

Richard James Hills, amicus curiae
Level 6 Aqua Training Suite, DIAC
02 6225 6776

Important Notice: If you have received this email by mistake, please advise
the sender and delete the message and attachments immediately.  This email,
including attachments, may contain confidential, sensitive, legally
privileged and/or copyright information.  Any review, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other
than the intended recipient is prohibited. DIAC respects your privacy and
has obligations under the Privacy Act 1988. The official departmental
privacy policy can be viewed on the department's website at www.immi.gov.au
See: http://www.immi.gov.au/functional/privacy.htm