Law 68D2b: They can continue playing, but only if all 4 players agree and the director has not been called. The claim is cancelled and the result obtained through play stands.
Otherwise call the director: Law 70 (Director adjucates).
@Pont said:
I vaguely recall something somewhere suggesting that declarer MUST lay down the hand and MUST state his planned order of play
Law 68C: A claim should be accompanied at once by a clear statement of the line of play or defence through which the claimer proposes to win the tricks claimed, including the order in which the cards will be played. The player making the claim or concession faces his hand.
But you asked what the oppositions rights are.
If declarer doesn't make a statement, then (if called) the director plays them per law 70.
Important to note that it says "should" and not "must". The introduction to the Laws say:
Established usage has been retained in regard to “may” do
(failure to do it is not wrong), “does” (establishes procedure
without suggesting that violation be penalised) “should” do
(failure to do it is an infraction jeopardising the infractor’s
rights but not often penalised),”shall” do (a violation will
incur a penalty more often than not) “must” do (the
strongest word, a serious matter indeed). Again “must not” is
the strongest prohibition, “shall not” is strong but “may not”
is stronger – just short of “must not”.
Comments
Law 68D2b: They can continue playing, but only if all 4 players agree and the director has not been called. The claim is cancelled and the result obtained through play stands.
Otherwise call the director: Law 70 (Director adjucates).
I vaguely recall something somewhere suggesting that declarer MUST lay down the hand and MUST state his planned order of play
Law 68C: A claim should be accompanied at once by a clear statement of the line of play or defence through which the claimer proposes to win the tricks claimed, including the order in which the cards will be played. The player making the claim or concession faces his hand.
But you asked what the oppositions rights are.
If declarer doesn't make a statement, then (if called) the director plays them per law 70.
Thanks
Important to note that it says "should" and not "must". The introduction to the Laws say:
Established usage has been retained in regard to “may” do
(failure to do it is not wrong), “does” (establishes procedure
without suggesting that violation be penalised) “should” do
(failure to do it is an infraction jeopardising the infractor’s
rights but not often penalised),”shall” do (a violation will
incur a penalty more often than not) “must” do (the
strongest word, a serious matter indeed). Again “must not” is
the strongest prohibition, “shall not” is strong but “may not”
is stronger – just short of “must not”.