On Sat, 20 Sep 2008, Pavitra wrote: >>>> Quite possibly that would violate R101. >>> If it does then so does the 5 CFJ thing >> That's why the wording of R101 clause is as it is; if you're told "you >> can re-initiate on the same subject next week" then you still have >> a reasonable expectation of resolution with minor delay (but still in >> reasonable time). I think there's a precedent on that somewhere? >> On the other hand, if there's a type of CFJ subject that can be refused >> indefinitely, that would violate R101. > > "to resolve matters of controversy". Refusal of a CFJ is within > 101(iii) if it's not actually controversial.
And who is to decide what's controversial? It's partially semantics though, I think a summary judgement would be fine though, as it "resolves" the matter. -Goethe
