CASE 26
Rule 14, Avoiding Contact
Rule 16.1, Changing Course
Rule 18.1, Mark-Room: When Rule 18 Applies
Rule 43.1(c), Exoneration
Rule 64.2, Decision: Penalties
A right-of-way boat need not act to avoid a collision until it
is clear that the other boat is not keeping clear. However, if
the right-of-way boat could then have avoided the collision
and the collision resulted in damage, she must be penalized
for breaking rule 14.
Facts
A Soling, S, and a 505, P, in separate races, approached the same mark on
opposite tacks. Unknown to P, which was lowering her spinnaker and
luffing to leave the mark to port, S was required to leave it to starboard and
was preparing to do so.
P heard no hail and was unaware of S’s presence until the boats were in the
positions shown in the diagram, at which time P’s crew saw S. He shouted
a warning and leaped out of the way just as S’s bow struck P’s hull behind
the mast, causing damage.
P protested S under rule 14 on the grounds that S could have avoided the
collision. S and two witnesses testified that S did not at any time change her
course before the collision. S, protesting under rule 10, claimed that if she
had changed course she would have broken rule 16.1.
The protest committee disqualified P under rules 10 and 14. P appealed.
Decision
P, as the keep-clear boat, failed to keep a lookout and to observe her primary
duties to keep clear and avoid contact. She broke both rule 10 and rule 14.
An important purpose of the rules of Part 2 is to avoid contact between
boats. To comply with rule 14, all boats, whether or not holding right of
way, must keep a lookout, particularly when approaching a mark. If P had
done so she would have become aware of S’s presence sooner and been able
to avoid the collision.
Rule 18 did not apply because S and P were not required to leave the mark
on the same side (see rule 18.1).
S was required by rule 14 to act to avoid contact with P at the moment it
was clear that P was not keeping clear. Before the positions shown in the
diagram it should have been clear to S that the boats were on converging
courses and that P was not keeping clear. At that time S could have luffed
and avoided contact with P. Such a change of course by S would have given
P more room to keep clear and would not have broken rule 16.1. S broke
rule 14 and, because the contact caused damage, she was not exonerated by
rule 43.1(c) and must be penalized (see rule 64.2.)
P was correctly disqualified under rules 10 and 14. S is also disqualified, for
breaking rule 14.
GBR 1971/4