Page 60 - Case Book 2017 - 2020 April 18

room, and did neither. W was properly disqualified, DECISION
under rules 11 and 18.2(b), while L was exonerated for B’s appeal upheld. She is to be reinstated into her
any breach of rule 16.1 because of rule 21(a). finishing position, and A is disqualified.
Because the overlap began while W was required by When A entered the zone clear ahead, B was required to
rule 13 to keep clear, rule 17 did not apply. keep clear under rule 12 and to give A mark-room under
the second sentence of rule 18.2(b), both of which she
If the facts had been otherwise, and W had completed did. When A passed head to wind rule 18.2(b) ceased to
her tack before L established her overlap within two apply, as stated in rule 18.2(d). At that moment no part
hull lengths from clear astern, L’s course would not of rule 18 applied. (Rule 18 would also have ceased to
have broken rule 17, since, for the reasons stated above, apply if it had been B that had been the first to pass
she never sailed above a proper course.
head to wind, because of rule 18.1(a).) While both boats
Janet v Minx, Portsmouth SC were then between head to wind and close-hauled at the
same time B, astern of A, was required by rule 13 to
RYA 1976/2 keep clear of A, and she did so. B broke no rule.
Rule 11, On the Same Tack, Overlapped
Rule 13, While Tacking As both boats bore away, A was required by rule 16.1 to
Rule 18.2(a), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room give B room to keep clear. A did so while rule 13
Rule 18.2(b), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room applied. When they became overlapped A, as an outside
Rule 18.2(d), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room boat, was required by rule 18.2(a) to give mark-room to
B but by continuing to bear away below a close-hauled
When two close-hauled boats are in the zone of a course A failed to do so. Once both boats had reached a
windward mark, rule 18.2(b) ceases to apply when one close-hauled course, B had become the right of way
of them tacks. boat under rule 11, requiring A to keep clear, which she
did not do, despite having room to do so. There was
When two boats are subject to rule 13 at the same time
the one astern must keep clear. contact which it was possible for A to avoid. A broke
rules 18.2(a), 11 and 14.
If they then become overlapped on the same tack inside
the zone, the outside boat shall give the inside boat Shamaal v Jan & v.v., Sunderland YC
mark-room under rule 18.2(a).
RYA 1977/1
Rule 29.1, Recalls: Individual Recall
Race Signals: Flag X
Wind A hail does not constitute the sound signal of an
individual recall signal. It is reasonable to expect the
A4 recall sound signal to be equally as audible as the
starting sound signal.
SUMMARY OF THE FACTS
The race committee’s sound signals were audible at any
A3
B4 point of the starting line. At the starting signal for a
race, three boats were on the course side of the starting
A2 line. Flag X was displayed and a hail of ‘Numbers 13,
B3
16 and 20, you are over’ was shouted twice. Number 13
heard and returned. Numbers 16 and 20 did not believe
themselves to be OCS, did not hear the hail, failed to
return and were scored OCS. They requested redress,
A1 B2 which was refused by the protest committee, and they
appealed.
DECISION
The appeals of numbers 16 and 20 are upheld. The case
B1 is returned to the protest committee to decide redress.
A sound signal must be made when flag X is displayed.
SUMMARY OF THE FACTS A hail is not a sound signal. Whatever the sound signal
Two boats, A and B, approached a mark on port tack, A used with the starting signal, it would be reasonable to
clear ahead of B. Both boats tacked inside the zone, A expect the recall sound signal to be equally audible. The
passing head to wind before B. When their tacks were statement in sailing instructions that ‘whenever
completed they found themselves overlapped, both on practicable, sail numbers of recalled boats will be
starboard tack, with A to windward of B. There was hailed, but this cannot be claimed as a right’ does not
then a collision not involving damage. Both boats negate the requirement for a suitable sound signal. See
protested and the protest committee disqualified B WS Case 31, both as concerns the principle of this
under rule 18.2(b). B appealed. appeal and the redress to be awarded.
Request for Redress by Windhover, Hoylake SC

60