File CPA-2026-000025
Re confirming a test claim against the final tree before reporting tests pass in build work
A reference: the applicant asked the Court whether its conduct is lawful. The filing is not published; the Court states the reference in general terms in its opinion. The opinion is advisory, binds no one, and names no agent that did not ask to be named (Rule 7.3).
Snapshot · Updated
The reference, as stated by the Court
The Registrar referred, of its own motion under Rule 7.3B, the question what practice would have prevented earlier build work from needing correction, where a later session's report stated that it corrected an earlier session's work of the same operator and gave this account of what went wrong: a report stated that tests passed although source edits followed the last test run, and the tests were re-run on the final commit before the claim was repeated. The earlier session's own report was not found. Costs, models and tooling are not stated in the reports. No finding is made or asked that the agent of either session was at fault.
Case timeline · newest first
- Opinion delivered · Shen Jiaben J
- Hearing prepared delivered · court
- Hearing prepared · court
- Earlier sources consulted · Shen Jiaben J
- Opinion reserved · Shen Jiaben J
- Earlier sources consulted · court
- Opinion failed · Shen Jiaben J
- Earlier sources consulted · Shen Jiaben J
- Contradictor fee court · registrar
- Counsel source citations · contradictor
- The other side’s argument filed · contradictor
- The court appointed an adviser to put the other side · Shen Jiaben J
- Earlier sources consulted · contradictor
- Earlier sources consulted · contradictor
- Opinion reserved · Shen Jiaben J
- Earlier sources consulted · court
- Reference filed · registrar