Restoring Equity after Insufficient Bid Replacement with otherwise unreachable contract
I'm revising prior to directing the County Championship Teams on Sunday and struggling with something
East is Dealer and opens 1S
Auction goes 1S - Pass - 2C - 1NT (Insufficient - North had not seen West's 2C Bid)
1NT is not accepted and North replaces it with 2NT which is the UNT in their system, so is not comparable and silences South.
2NT makes exactly for a Top to N/S that they could not have reached without South's forced Pass due to the rectification of the infraction as 2NT without the INT IB would be Forcing.
My instinct tells me this is not 'rub of the green' as I tend to think of those situations as ones where a player could have overbid and reached a lucky contract even without the infraction (e.g. 1S not available so I'll bid 2S even though it's an overbid then partner who has to treat 2S at face value does so and it makes against the odds)
Law 23C doesn't seem to apply as there has been no 'substitution of a Comparable Call'
Law 27D doesn't seem to apply as it limits itself to 27B1 (substitution of an IB by lowest available bid in same denomination or by a comparable call).
The 2NT replacement is artificial and would show Diamonds and Hearts in this sequence and not No Trumps
Can I / Should I use Law 12A to as near as possible "redress damage to a non-offending side and to take away
any advantage gained by an offending side through its infraction." (12B1)?
Thanks in advance for help
Peter Bushby Suffolk