Page 98 - Case Book 2017 - 2020 April 18

protest hearing. A protest committee cannot protest SUMMARY OF THE FACTS
based on information learned in a request for redress. Salena, whose hull length exceeded 6 metres, hailed
Touchwood that she was protesting, and, as a protest
SUMMARY OF THE FACTS signal, displayed a grey and red glove in her rigging. At
Vanilla, a boat of a class sailed only at the club, crossed the start of the hearing, Touchwood objected to the
the finishing line in first place. The trophy for the race validity of the protest, on the grounds that a red flag had
was awarded to the boat that finished second, and not been flown. The protest committee found that
Vanilla was told that she had been disqualified by the Touchwood had heard the hail and seen the glove. It
officers of the class because she had not complied with believed that Touchwood regarded the glove, while not
a recent change to class rules. She asked for redress
a flag in the normal sense, as signalling an intention to
The protest committee found that the class officers ‘had protest, particularly in the context of three hails from
not complied with rule 60.2’ in disqualifying Vanilla Salena to Touchwood to keep clear, a hail of ‘Protest’, a
without a hearing, but that the amendment to class rules request to take a penalty, and a radio message from
was valid and, as Vanilla did not comply with class Salena on an open channel that she was protesting.
rules, she was now disqualified by the protest Touchwood was disqualified for not keeping clear, and
committee. Vanilla appealed.
appealed.
DECISION DECISION
Vanilla’s appeal is upheld. She is to be reinstated into Touchwood’s appeal is upheld and she is reinstated into
first place and receive the trophy.
her finishing position.
The protest committee was correct to conclude that The RYA is satisfied that Touchwood objected to
Vanilla was wrongly disqualified. Vanilla had finished validity at the start of the hearing, and was therefore
first. There had been no protest and no hearing. If the entitled to appeal.
race committee or another boat believed Vanilla to be
‘out of class’, one or more of them should have Rule 61.1(a) required a boat of Salena’s length to
protested her. A class association has no power to display a red protest flag. The glove displayed was not a
protest, let alone disqualify without a hearing. red flag, nor did it comply with the requirement in WS
Case 72 to be seen primarily as a flag. In the words of
The protest committee was wrong to believe that it then the protest committee itself, it was ‘not a flag in the
had a power to disqualify. The hearing was not a normal sense’, and, even if the protestor’s intention to
protest, but a request for redress. It is clear throughout protest was clear from the hail, a protestee is entitled to
Part 5 of the Racing Rules of Sailing that protests and contest the validity of a protest when the requirements
requests for redress are different from each other. of rule 61.1(a) are not complied with. Touchwood is
Nothing in rule 64.2, Decisions on Redress, allows a reinstated into her finishing position.
protest committee to disqualify a boat requesting
redress. The power in rule 64.1 to disqualify applies Salena v Touchwood, Liverpool YC
only to a boat that is a party to a protest hearing, and not
to a boat that is a party to a redress hearing. RYA 2001/14
Definitions, Obstruction
It is well established that a protest committee may not Rule 19.1, Room to Pass an Obstruction: When Rule 19
expand the scope of a request for redress beyond the Applies
‘incident’ giving rise to the request, which was that Rule 19.2(a), Room to Pass an Obstruction: Giving
Vanilla finished first and was disqualified without a Room at an Obstruction
hearing – see WS Case 80. Nor may a protest Rule 19.2(b), Room to Pass an Obstruction: Giving
committee change a request for redress into a protest – Room at an Obstruction
see RYA Case 1990/7. In addition, rule 60.3(a) says Rule 20.1, Room to Tack at an Obstruction: Hailing
that, in the absence of exceptions that are not relevant
here, a protest committee cannot protest a boat based on The question of whether a moored vessel is an
information learned in a request for redress. obstruction depends on the definition of the term, which
cannot be changed in sailing instructions.
Request for redress by Vanilla, Parkstone YC
When overlapped boats on the same tack are
RYA 2001/13 approaching an obstruction that could be passed on
Rule 61.1(a), Protest Requirements: Informing the either side by both of them, the leeward right-of-way
Protestee boat may decide that both shall pass to windward. If the
Rule 63.5, Hearings: Validity of the Protest or Request leeward boat decides to pass the obstruction to leeward,
for Redress she must be prepared to give room to the windward
boat to do the same.
A glove cannot be a protest flag.
QUESTION 1
When the display of a protest flag is required but not We sail on a river with many yachts and keelboats on
complied with, a protestee’s objection at the start of a moorings in the racing area. Confusion has arisen
hearing to the validity of the protest is to be upheld even concerning rule 19.1 when a moored boat can often be
if the protestee must have been well aware of the passed on either side. Does rule 19 apply?
intention to protest.

98