PART 5
Consistent – but it is in fact history rewritten. For many years, the case’s original decision said that all the boats might be entitled to redress, but those which finished in line with the definition should all be scored better than those that finished in accordance with the sailing instruction. In a rare reconsideration of an actual decision, it was more recently felt that to rank the boats in this way was wrong. To be entitled to redress, a boat must be without fault. If, as in this case, no boat was at fault, then it would be inappropriate to grant redress in a way that implied fault1
. So if
a protest committee finds itself in a situation where it feels a need to rank the redress it is to give, perhaps it should ask itself whether in fact one or more boat was at fault, and therefore not entitled to redress at all2
.
When redress for a misleading course is due, it may not always be possible just to let the finishing results stand, since some boats may have sailed a considerably longer distance that others. A protest committee can ‘make some other arrangement’, in the shape of identifying which boat sailed which course and treating these as races within a race. If, in a ten-boat race, seven boats sailed an ‘improper’ course intended by the race committee, but three sailed a shorter course that is found by the protest committee to be valid, then the race might be scored with two firsts, two seconds, two thirds, then fourth to seventh3
.
The need for the protest committee to be aware of all possible consequences of the redress that is contemplated justifies the widening of a hearing to hear from all boats that may be affected by potentially controversial redress granted to only one or some of them, as discussed under rule 63.3.
Decisions on Protests Concerning Class Rules
Rule 64.3 deals with particular issues arising from measurement or inspection. When none of clauses (a) and (d) apply, a boat that is found not to comply with her class rules will be penalised.
The other side of rule 64.3)(a)’s coin is that when excess deviations are not caused by damage or normal wear, then the boat is to be penalised, and that, if the boat does not protect her position under rule 64.3(d) and races again before correcting the defect, she will be open to further protest – not only under the class rule but possibly under rule 2, Fair Sailing, added to which a hearing under rule 69, Misconduct, is possible. It also follows that excess deviations, even if caused by damage or normal wear, will result in penalisation if they improve the performance of the boat, although it will be difficult to establish where the boundary lies.
Rule 64.3(c) now clarifies an issue about which there had been uncertainty – if a boat is found not to comply with class rules in protest arising from race 5 of a regatta, and it is clear that she must have been non-compliant in races 1 to 4, can she be retrospectively penalised without a further protest? Yes, says this new rule.
Protest committees are sometimes hesitant when faced with a measurement protest. There is usually no need to be. A ruling from ‘an authority responsible for interpreting the rule’ has to be called for only when the protest committee is in doubt about the meaning of a class rule. When there is no doubt, the protest committee can make up its own mind, and nothing stops a protest committee from seeking other expert evidence. In RYA 1992/2, Samba was protested by another boat for being ‘out of class’ in respect of several specific class measurement rules. The protest committee referred the matter to a class association measurer who was present at the championship. After receiving his report it disqualified her for not complying with class rules. She appealed on the grounds, among others, that the class measurer had competed in the regatta. Her appeal was dismissed.
1 Usually, if a World Sailing case is decided no longer to be correct (as can happen – but not in this case – because of a rule change), then the case is either edited or withdrawn. To edit it so as to change the substance of the decision is unusual, but it was felt that the corrected decision
was important, and the national authority that had originally submitted the case gave its approval. 2 Again, the benefit of the doubt may be relevant. 3 This does not extend to situations where a boat found a shorter way to sail a valid course, usually because what was intended to be a
rounding mark was not suitably identified, and so did not have to be approached while racing. No redress is due to the others, except possibly the abandonment of the race. See under rule 28.1.
216 RYA The Racing Rules Explained
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212 |
Page 213 |
Page 214 |
Page 215 |
Page 216 |
Page 217 |
Page 218 |
Page 219 |
Page 220 |
Page 221 |
Page 222 |
Page 223 |
Page 224 |
Page 225 |
Page 226 |
Page 227 |
Page 228 |
Page 229 |
Page 230 |
Page 231 |
Page 232 |
Page 233 |
Page 234 |
Page 235 |
Page 236 |
Page 237 |
Page 238 |
Page 239 |
Page 240 |
Page 241 |
Page 242 |
Page 243 |
Page 244 |
Page 245 |
Page 246 |
Page 247 |
Page 248 |
Page 249 |
Page 250 |
Page 251 |
Page 252 |
Page 253 |
Page 254 |
Page 255 |
Page 256
