Originally Posted by OleCuss
This may be a dumb question, but did you mean "worse case" instead of the "worst case" you typed?
If it were "worst case" I'd imagine that you expect dire consequences for the deficiency but you indicated previously that you didn't think the issue would be significant in either case.
I did mean worst case, but allow me to clarify the limits of my opinion. Given the ability to notify, or not to notify, and the belief in a tactical advantage in not notifying, with regard to effects of rule 5.1 one the case, the worst possible scenario would be to give notice, but to have it be deficient. You get the worst of both worlds, so to speak.
The effect of the "worst case scenario" however, given rule 5.1 and those facts, is unlikely to have any significant effect on the outcome of the case, for the reasons I already mentioned.