Page 104 - Case Book 2017 - 2020 April 18

QUESTION 3 ANSWER
Is a boat entitled to redress under the Racing Rules of No. WS Case 80 states that a redress hearing must be
Sailing if a valid change to the notice of race affects her confined to the subject of the request. Additionally, the
adversely? request cannot be extended into a protest against one or
more boats.
ANSWER 3
An action of the organizing authority can lead to In this question the request for redress was made under
redress, but only if it is improper, and it significantly rule 62.1(c) and relates to giving help as required by
worsens a boat’s score. rule 1.1. Rule 64.2 states that the protest committee,
when granting redress, shall make as fair an
QUESTION 4 arrangement as possible for all boats affected. In this
If a sailing instruction conflicts with the notice of race, context, ‘all boats affected’ means all boats that gave
which prevails?
help as required by rule 1.1. Redress cannot be given to
ANSWER 4 other boats for reasons outside the scope of the original
The protest committee shall decide which rule will request under rule 62.1(c).
provide the fairest result for all boats affected, as stated A separate hearing is required to find facts about the
in rule 63.7.
incident between A and B. Consideration of redress
QUESTION 5 might arise from a protest by one or both of the boats
If the sailing instructions say that a sailing instruction against the other, or lodged by a race committee or
prevails when there is a conflict between the notice of protest committee, including a protest under rule
race and a sailing instruction, is that binding? 60.3(a)(1) by the protest committee if the damage may
have been serious. (In the circumstances stated, a
ANSWER 5 request for redress by A or B under rule 62.1(b), and no
A statement in the sailing instructions that they are to protest, would be technically sufficient for redress to be
prevail over the notice of race is not binding. Any such considered. However, any boat involved in such a
provision should be in the notice of race itself, and collision and seeking redress would be best advised to
should refer to rule 63.7 as being changed.
protest the other boat as well, so that the protest
Questions from Horning SC committee is able to find facts having heard both
parties. Not to do so could lead to the other boat in turn
RYA 2002/9 seeking redress – see RYA case 1996/8.)
Rule 60.1, Right to Protest; Right to Request Redress or
Rule 69 Action The facts found in a protest may be that one or both
Rule 60.3(a)(1), Right to Protest; Right to Request boats broke a rule of Part 2. In this case no
Redress or Rule 69 Action disqualification is possible because both boats retired,
Rule 60.3(b), Right to Protest; Right to Request Redress which counts as a penalty for any breach of a rule of
or Rule 69 Action Part 2. The facts may then support a simultaneous claim
Rule 62, Redress for redress from a boat, or may, if redress is not
Rule 64.1(b), Decisions: Penalties and Exoneration requested, nevertheless give the protest committee a
Rule 64.2, Decisions: Decisions on Redress reason for considering redress under rule 60.3(b).
Question from Carrickfergus Sailing Club
When redress is requested, a protest committee is not
entitled to award redress to a boat that is not a party to RYA 2002/10
that hearing based on facts outside the scope of the Rule 34, Mark Missing
request. A fresh hearing is required. When redress is Rule 62.1(a), Redress
being considered for a boat as a result of physical
damage, a separate protest hearing is not essential for When a race committee learns before a race that a fixed
there to be a conclusion that another boat did or did not mark is out of place, it must advise competitors. If it
break a rule of Part 2, but in practice it is desirable, learns of this during a race, it must, if possible, act
even if the protestee has taken a penalty and so cannot under rule 34. If it could do either, but does not, this
be penalized. can give rise to the possibility of redress, which is not to
be refused to a boat affected and without fault because
ASSUMED FACTS of a clause in the sailing instructions denying liability
There is contact between A and B resulting in damage for the accuracy of the position given for the mark.
to both boats. A and B retire. C and D give help. C asks However, a boat that relies solely on GPS for
for redress under rule 62.1(c). The protest committee navigation is not without fault if she herself could have
upholds her request, and gives redress to her and D. earlier detected the error visually.
There is no protest.
A race committee is not under a duty to check the
QUESTION positions it receives for all the fixed marks it may use.
Is the protest committee further entitled to decide, solely
on the evidence at the hearing of C’s request for redress, SUMMARY OF THE FACTS
that B broke a rule of Part 2, that A broke no rule, and The course for a race early in the season was selected
that A is therefore also entitled to redress under rule from a list of marks in the sailing instructions, headed
62.1(b), even though she had not asked for it? ‘No responsibility is accepted for any error in the
indicated positions’. Some of the marks to be used were

104