[blml] Misbids, infractions, and Wolffs, oh my... [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Grattan Endicott]

Grattan Endicott
grandeval at vejez.fsnet .co.uk
[also gesta at tiscali.co.uk]
*************************
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <richard.hills at immi.gov.au>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 4:26 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] Misbids, infractions, and Wolffs,
                            oh my... [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]


>>
>>To me, it is obvious that this reasoning is nonsense.
>> It basically says that if my date stood me up that 
>> there has never been an agreement to meet in the 
>> first place.
>>
+=+ The 'date' may simply not have told you that at 
no time did she ever intend to be there. In that case 
there never was an actual agreement although there 
may have been a purported agreement. In the law 
book the existence of an 'agreement' is conditioned 
by notions of disclosure (Law 40B et al)  and of 
announcement (Law 75). 
    "What a man would like to be true, that he more
readily believes."
                    ~ Grattan ~   +=+