richard.hills at immi.gov.au richard.hills at immi.gov.au
Tue May 25 08:12:44 CEST 2010

The ACBL Director Ruling:

It was determined that:

1. There was a BIT by West before the pass over 5C.
2. The BIT demonstrably suggested the double by East.
3. Pass by East is a logical alternative.

Therefore, the contract was changed to 5C by South (no
double) and the result to down two, N/S minus 100 and
E/W + 100.

The ACBL lack-of-natural-justice Appeal:

E/W appealed and East and West were the only players
to attend the review.

E/W said that South did not hesitate (as required)
before bidding 5C. West considered his call before
passing to 5C but neither East nor West thought that
West's BIT was long; 5-10 or 10-12 seconds.

The ACBL Appeals Panel Decision:

Since South did not pause any of the required 10
seconds, West was entitled to some amount of time.
Therefore, the panel judged that there was no BIT and
no infraction. The table contract of 5C doubled by
South was restored with the result of down two. N/S
minus 300 and E/W plus 300.

Richard Hills:

Why, at ACBL nationals, is it policy for the table TD
to be excluded from giving testimony at appeals?

And why, in all ACBL events, is it policy for Appeals
Committees and Appeals Panels to restart the ruling
from scratch?  Is it not sensible for the ACBL to now
adopt the Rest-Of-The-World approach of a default
belief (until persuaded by new evidence) that the
table TD got the ruling right the first time?

And how can an ACBL Appeals Panel presume to over-
rule an ACBL Director-at-the-table on a simple matter
of fact best determined at the table?  Or was the
ACBL Appeals Panel implicitly deciding that the ACBL
Director-at-the-table was incompetent at gathering all
the facts?

Perhaps the ACBL Appeals Panel was swayed by the non-
appearance of North-South.  In that case North-South
were impaled on the horns of a Minotaur:

(a) miss their dinner break to ensure that a
completely meritless appeal by East-West gained the
AWMW that it deserved, or

(b) go to their dinner break, thus allowing East-West
to state uncontested terminological inexactitudes.

Best wishes

Richard Hills, Aqua 5, workstation W550
Telephone: 02 6223 8453
Email: richard.hills at immi.gov.au
Recruitment Section & DIAC Social Club movie tickets

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:


More information about the Blml mailing list