A zombie auction can be terminated "if the Auction has not ended and the Auctioneer of that Auction cannot transfer any item included in a lot in that Auction" (as says rule 2552). In this case, one lot could not be transferred. The question is whether the auction can end if one lot cannot be transferred, or only if all of them cannot be transferred.
The word "any" can mean each. In most legal contexts it does mean each(see SAS Institute v Iancu). But that only tends to be the case when it is used with "a singular noun in affirmative contexts" (this is quoting SAS Institute). In other contexts, any means "one or more selected items in a group". The sentence at issue here involves a negative context, and in such context, a legal dictate tends to apply when one or more of the items does not satisfy a condition, rather than when all of them do not. Let me provide an example sentence. "The supplier can embargo a certain region if we cannot receive safety assurances from any country included in the region". That sentence is basically a mirror of rule 2552, and it's clear to all that one country failing to provide assurances is enough for the whole region to be subject to embargo. Alexis offers a sentence similar to "I can't understand any of your questions". In this case, any clearly means each, all questions are incomprehensible to the speaker. That example sentence, though, is much further away from the rule itself than mine, and mine disproves the rule offered that "any" after a negated verb always means "each". Instead, I think, it is purely contextual. But take this sentence "if any item can't be transferred, the auction can be cancelled". That's just a simplified and switched up version of the actual rule at issue, but I don't think anyone can read that at first scan and think that _every_ item must be unable to be transferred I have said before in CFJs that we resolve textual arguments not like robots, but with the reading of reasonable English speakers in mind. I am not pointed to any grammatical canon which clearly resolves this case. Indeed, looking at grammatical explanations of the word "any" available to me, two different meanings seemed to be distinguishable often only by context. My first reading of the rule 2552 is that one inability to transfer nixes the whole auction. Take this sentence "A worker CAN dispose of a shipment of apples if any apple within it cannot be eaten". In that case, just like this one, one rotten apple spoils the bunch, consistent with, although not strictly required by, rules of grammar. On the basis of natural grammar, my first reading as a reasonable speaker, and the context of one wrong thing being involved in a lot of multiple, inextricable things (just like my regions or apples examples), I judge CFJ 3826 FALSE -- >From R. Lee
