2.a is a generalised synopsis, that deliberately blocks the specifics on legality, the council failed to address, and clearly shows avoidance. This is impermissible, and shall have to be addressed first, BEFORE moving on to any irrelevant thesis and other fallacies that remain, at the end of the topic. IF the adjudicator is flexible on this and strict on hearing their argument before they rebut cogently the Appellant's, then they breach the spirit of CPR 16.5 and the adjudicator shall be scrutinised for 'not furthering the overriding objective' in the spirit of CPR 1.1-1.4.
Irrelevance. This fallacy has more names than just about anyother. The classical logicians called it ; itsmodern names include irrelevant thesis, ignoring the issue, red herring,irrelevant conclusion, diversion, and irrelevant proof. Sometimes whenan arguer cannot prove or disprove a particular point, he will simply shifthis discussion over to a point that he can prove or disprove, and thenimply that the original point has been treated. In one form of irrelevantproof, an arguer may attempt to prove something that has not even beendenied, such as a related or incidental fact:Note especially in this last example that the fallacy is very attractiveand often persuasive to the person employing it because it does prove apoint or state a true argument, and the point is often related to the issueat hand, sometimes even very closely. The husband here may actually havemore or less equated (or confused) material support with love, so thatto him the argument appears legitimate.
Irrelevant Thesis (Ignoration Elenchi)
Sometimes an arguer will oversimplify the original issue so that itis easily rebutted:Note that the supporting statements of both of these arguments are quitetrue. However, they are irrelevant because the proponents of the pollutioncontrol scheme and the ethics classes certainly would not claim such impossiblebenefits as mountain pure air or an end to crime.