On 8/3/2019 3:57 PM, Nich Evans wrote:
>> R849 clearly prohibits the registration.  The "Comptrollor" ban we added
>> in R2140 recently to prevent lower-powered rules from prohibiting proposal
>> clauses in higher-powered proposals doesn't apply, because R2140 includes
>> the "below the power of this rule" qualifier and R849 is power 3.
>> -G.
> Not sure I follow? R2140 is P3. R106 "Adopting Proposals" and R2350
> "Proposals" are both also P3, so not less. They should be able to set
> something to P>3, right? Am I missing something?

A Proposal with P>3 is still subject to R106's "Except as prohibited by
other rules" clause in terms of a particular clause taking effect.
R849 does the prohibiting for registration before 30 days.

There's no method for a power 3.1 proposal "beating out" a Power-3 Rule
due to a conflict - R106 just straight up says "if there's a prohibition,
the clause doesn't take effect."

If the proposal created a power 3.1 rule that said "nch is registered"
then we could use rule 1030, but that's not what the clause does.

A recent-ish CFJ (can't find it this minute but I'll look harder) found that
since R106 had numerical precedence over R2140 (before R2140 was amended),
R106 even allowed for a power-1 rule to impose a prohibition on a clause in
a power-4 proposal.  We added "rules to the contrary notwithstanding" to
R2140 to solve that - but R2140 still only applies to instruments below
power-3.  Since everything in this case is power 3+, that doesn't help.


Reply via email to