Case II
Ab claim “the game” and score it. After the trump card of the following deal is turned up, YZ object that AB have not claimed honours (vide Laws 6 and 7).
Decision—The honours were claimed within the meaning of the law. The objection to the score, if made really in ignorance of how it accrued, should have been taken at once. YZ should not wait the completion of the deal, so as to entrap AB on a mere technicality.
Note. This is a good instance of interpretation in accordance with the spirit of the law. Laws should never be so construed as to inflict a wholly unnecessary wrong, as would happen in this case were the law insisted on literally. The intention of Law 7 is to require AB to draw attention to the claim; and this is sufficiently done by the claim of “the game.”