Gordon Aickin made the following Appeal on Judgement J(10):

Clearly this Judgment is inconsistent, There is no rule that says the Speaker may not distribute a non-legal Judgement.

Rule 328 says that the speaker must distribute that judgement as soon as possible, but nowhere does it say that he may not distribute non-legal judgements. (So under 116 distributing non-legal judgements is fine.)

Anyway I would maintain that this Judgement was distributed in error, the Speaker failing to notice that the judgement was not a "legal judgement" as that is defined in 401.


The Appeal Panel consisted of Tim Ricketts, Nick Fortescue, and Ian Snell. The original Judgement J(10) was upheld. Tim Ricketts wrote:

I have not been following the game very much recently so I will base my judgement entirely on what I can see at this moment (this email and part of rule 401). Gordon's appeal text seems to be saying that there is no rule saying the non-legal judgements should not be distributed; therefore the original judgement should not have been distributed, because it was not legal.

[ Judgements index | | | OxNomic ]
Created 18.ii.98, last modified 25.ii.98 by Colin Batchelor, OxNomic Recorder