Page 82 - Case Book 2017 - 2020 April 18

The protest committee found as a fact that the crew of B proper care in establishing them. The protest committee
touched the mark. There was adequate evidence for it to applied rule 18.2(b) correctly to disqualify O.
arrive at this conclusion and the RYA sees no reason to Sunshine v Point Blank, Royal Thames YC
question the protest committee's decision.

Outside witnesses are not essential, although they may RYA 1993/1
help a protest committee to decide a case. In many Rule 28, Sailing the Course
incidents the protestor and protestee are the only ones Rule 62.1(a), Redress
who see what happens, but this does not prevent a When a course set by the race committee is ambiguous,
protest from being decided. so that all boats break, or appear to break, rule 28, they

Solo 3591 v Solo 3583, Papercourt SC are all entitled to redress.
RYA 1992/9
Rule 18.2(e), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room
A protest committee should have recourse to rule A
18.2(e) only when there is insufficient reliable evidence
for it to decide the case otherwise.
SUMMARY OF THE FACTS
A collision took place at a mark between I (inside) and
O (outside). The two boats were overlapped at five hull Course sailed by appellant
lengths from the mark; at four lengths it was agreed that
O luffed and broke the overlap but it was re-established Starting Line
(I claimed) while O was bearing away for the mark, at X
which time she was still outside the zone. In protest and B
counter-protest, O denied I's statement that I had Course sailed by 5 boats
become overlapped again in proper time.
The protest committee, finding that I had become
overlapped again in proper time and that O had failed to
give I mark-room under the first sentence of rule
18.2(b), disqualified O. She appealed, on the grounds C
that ‘the onus was on the inside boat to satisfy the
protest committee that she established the overlap in
accordance with rule 18.2(b); not on the protest SUMMARY OF THE FACTS
committee trying to prove the situation through dubious The relevant section of the sailing instructions for the
conclusions drawn from the facts given by both parties.’ event stated: ‘cross line at the end of each round’; the
starting and finishing line was given as ‘between the
DECISION
O’s appeal is dismissed. committee boat mast displaying a blue flag and X’
On the notice board, the course set for a race was:
A protest committee begins a hearing with an open
mind. Evidence is then presented. Contrary to the views X-A-B-C-X. All marks to starboard, 3 times round
of the appellant, statements made in evidence by the
parties and witnesses are not facts. When, having heard Five boats (out of a fleet of six) sailed one course (solid
the evidence, the protest committee is reasonably sure line), the sixth another (dotted line). The sixth boat
of what happened, even though (as is usual) there was protested the other five for not sailing the course, but
conflicting evidence, it will state what it believed to was herself disqualified for not passing through the
have happened as facts found, apply the rules to those finishing line at the end of each round. She appealed.
facts, and decide accordingly. DECISION

When the protest committee is unsure about the facts, it All six boats are entitled to redress.
is normally the protestee that gets the benefit of any The course set included mark X as:
doubt. However, rule 18.2(e) states that, in the special
case of reasonable doubt that a boat obtained or broke (a) a starting mark
an overlap in time, it shall be presumed that she did not, (b) the first and last rounding mark of each lap, and
a presumption that may favour either protestee or
protestor. (c) a finishing mark.

While this was a case involving the obtaining of an Mark X could not be both a starting mark and the
overlap, it was not a case involving reasonable doubt. purported first mark of the course. At the end of each
The protest committee was satisfied on the evidence round, the only way the course could have been
that the overlap was re-established in time, and rule correctly sailed, if at all, was to execute a 360° turn
18.2(e) was not applicable. The RYA is satisfied with around mark X, leaving it to starboard. Indeed, the
the facts presented and that the protest committee took course might have been interpreted to require a 720°
rounding of mark X. It was thereafter impossible to

82