Case 2

A bids two Hearts, Y bids two Diamonds,--B demands that the Y

declaration be made sufficient. Y says, "I correct my declaration to

three Diamonds." B passes, Z bids three No-trumps. A claims that Z has

no right to bid.


Law 50 provides that "in case of an insufficient declaration ... the

partner is debarred from making any further declaration." This exactly

covers the case in question. True it is that Law 52 provides that,

prior to the next player passing, declaring, or doubling, a declaration

inadvertently made may be corrected. The obvious intent of this law is

that it shall apply when a player says, "Two Diamonds--I mean, three

Diamonds"; or, "Two Spades--I mean two Royals"; and that such

correction shall be allowed without penalty if the declaration has

really been inadvertently made and neither adversary has taken any

action whatever. We interpret 52 by reading into it the additional

words, "or either adversary calls attention to the insufficient

declaration." The construction put upon 52 by Y would result in

nullifying a most important part of 50.

The claim of A is sustained.

Case 12 Case 3 facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail