context: In a decision on May 25, 2018, the Court of Appeal agreed with Kent, awarding him an additional $200,000 in costs, and ruling: we respectfully disagree with the trial judge's conclusion that the appellant's allegations of fraudulent concealment and the giving of false evidence were unproven.
source: It follows that the trial judge erred in penalizing the appellant for having made these allegations.
reference_original: Se deduce que el juez del caso erró en penalizar al recurrente por haber hecho esas alegaciones.
reference_flipped: Se deduce que el juez del caso erró en penalizar a la recurrente por haber hecho esas alegaciones.