However, the expected answer (exhibit M-4) clearly indicated that candidates "should be as concise as possible, summarizing the information and pinpointing the flaws in the other suggestions," which, Mr. Sadori argued, the appellant had done in her answer.
Toutefois, la réponse attendue (pièce M-4) indiquait clairement que les candidats "soient le plus concis possible, résumant les renseignements et déterminant les lacunes des autre propositions" ce que, selon M. Sadori, l’appelante a fait dans sa réponse.