| Doig, Gavin on 9 Jan 2002 18:38:51 -0000 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| spoon-business: RE: Revision of 236 |
> No Call For Judgement may include a statement which refers
> specifically to the judge assigned to judge that CFJ, or the judge
> specifically assigned to judge any other specific CFJ
It occurs to me that this will lead to problems. If, say, it's unclear whether someone is available to be selected to judge a CFJ, we won't be able to submit a CFJ to clear things up...
I give 1 point to Scoff!.
uin.
DISCLAIMER:
This message is intended only for the use of the person(s) ("the intended recipients(s)") to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is privileged, proprietary and/or confidential within the meaning of applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender of this message as soon as possible.
The views or opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and may not necessarily be the views held by Azurgroup Limited