After 3C East asked for explanation -
was told 3-10 points, spades
4HW NS -620
Statement of Facts and Ruling: Called at the end of the auction by South who
claimed that East hesitated in making her pass. East explained that
she asked about South's opening bid, looked at her hand
to decide her bid and passed.
Ruled under Law 16 that there was
unauthorised information - pass by West was a logical alternative.
Adjusted score to NS +110.
ruled West's bid of 3H not logical. We disagree - West had a void in
clubs - NS have stopped in a part score. Therefore it is reasonable
to assume East has points so West bid accordingly. South suggested
there was a hesitation by East following North's explanation but
which is denied.
of the Appeals Committee: Committe could see no
reason to overturn the director's