[blml] What constitutes a frivolous appeal?

[John Probst]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tim West-Meads" <twm at cix.co.uk>
To: <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 1:37 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] What constitutes a frivolous appeal?


> Grattan wrote:
>
>> +=+ The views of an appeals advisor, consultant or 'cuddly'
>> (see OB 8A2),  should not be known to the AC. Indeed,
>> there is no reason for an AC to know that any such advice
>> has been made available to the appellant.
>
> There is nothing in OB8a2 which *precludes* the views of an advisor from
> being made known to the AC.  While the AC is in no way bound to heed any
> such views neither are they entitled to refuse to even consider such
> views when presented as part of the evidence.
>
> For example I might be approached by a weak pair who are unhappy with a
> ruling but can't really say why (mostly they just don't understand the
> law and I can explain why the ruling was as it was and their desire to
> appeal will go away).  But sometimes it will become clear to me that the
> TD missed a key point in making his decision (perhaps some abstruse
> inference of the opposing system of which I happen to be aware).  If the
> point is sufficiently abstruse that I believe the weak pair may be
> unable even to articulate it to an AC I will provide a written
> commentary which they can choose to present to the AC if they think it
> necessary.  The AC can, of course, investigate the evidence I have
> prepared and rule "Tim is obviously doolally and what's more he's not
> even an official advisor - it's your fault for consulting him and we
> consider the appeal frivolous".  However, if the AC actually refuses to
> consider the additional evidence *at all* the matter should be referred
> to the NA on a point of principle.

I concur with this point of view entirely. I pointed a player, inexperienced 
indeed, in Tim's direction for an appeal on BridgeClubLive! and added the 
substance of his opinion to the evidence to be presented to the AC. To do 
otherwise would not do credit to the appeals process. In part, as a result 
of his opinion, the appeal was partially successful and the deposit was 
never in doubt.  john

>
> Tim
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml