Opinion 75 issued by the Judicial Commission is based on an interpretation of the Rules of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria (the Code) that failed to take into consideration changes made to the Code by the Judicial Commission prior to consideration of the original Request for an Opinion. Furthermore, closer examination of the Request indicates a number of contradictions that have been carried over into the published Opinion. The Judicial Commission is therefore requested to re-examine Opinion 75.
The Judicial Commission has ruled that subgenus names within the genus Moraxella should be considered to have been included on the Approved Lists, together with the corresponding species names within these subgenera. Closer examination of the facts, including the wording of the relevant passages in the Code and the original publication in which these names are included, together with information that has subsequently come to light, indicates that there is good cause to re-examine the facts on which this Opinion is based.
There is some degree of confusion surrounding Rule 15 of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria and the fact that it appears to contradict the general principle of priority, which is central to codes of nomenclature. The present overview attempts to highlight the problem and also to provide a basis for discussion towards a solution.
Note 1 of Rule 24a of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria can be interpreted in an ambiguous fashion, because the wording is not sufficiently clear. It is proposed that the wording of this note be modified to clarify this point.