The Appeals Book for 2009–2012

APPEAL 2
Doon vs. Esperanza
Cacouette vs. Doon
Rule 10, On Opposite Tacks
Rule 20.1, Room to Tack at an Obstruction
Rule 64.1(c), Decisions: Penalties and Exoneration
When a port-tack leeward boat, on a collision course with a starboard-tack boat, hails the
port-tack windward boat for room to tack and she fails to respond, the port-tack leeward
boat’s obligation under rule 10 continues. A boat breaking a rule is not entitled to exonera-
tion unless she could not avoid breaking it.

PW4 S4

Mark
COURSE TO
COURSE TO WIND
PL4
NEXT MARK
NEW MARK PW3 S3
12-15 KNOTS

PL3
PW2
S2

PL2
PW1
S1
PL1

Facts and Decision of the Protest Committee

Three small scow-type boats approached a windward mark to be left to port, one on starboard
tack and two on port. Esperanza (PW) hailed Doon (PL) for mark-room under rule 18.2(b)
(Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room), and PL hailed PW for room to tack under rule 20.1. PW
failed to respond. Cacouette (S) luffed to avoid a collision, and both PW and PL tacked around
the mark inside her.
PL claimed that she did not bear away under the stern of S because she thought that, with
the type of boat and the strength of wind, a collision would result. However, the protest
committee found that she could have borne away safely or slacked her sheets.
PW was disqualified under rule 20.1 on PL’s protest and did not appeal. PL was disqualified
under rule 10 on S’s protest and she appealed.
Decision of the Appeals Committee
Both PW and PL were obligated to keep clear of S, under rule 10 while on port tack and
under rule 13 (While Tacking) after passing head to wind while tacking. PW was correctly
disqualified for breaking rule 20.1, by not responding to a hail for room to tack.

B-2 January 2009

 Section 2 – Appeals and Questions

When PW failed to respond to PL’s hail for room to tack, PL was faced with the necessity
of taking alternative action to avoid S. This raises the question of whether she should be
exonerated under rule 64.1(c) as the innocent victim of another boat’s breach. We think not,
since the protest committee found that she could have gone astern of S. A boat breaking a rule
is not entitled to exoneration unless she was compelled by another boat to break a rule.
PL’s appeal is denied. The decision of the protest committee is upheld, and both PL and PW
remain disqualified.
November 1940

APPEAL 3
Red Hed vs. Sea Urchin
Rule 11, On the Same Tack, Overlapped
Rule 14, Avoiding Contact
Rule 18.2(b), Mark-Room: Giving Mark-Room
Definitions, Mark-Room
An inside windward boat, given sufficient mark-room at a mark, is required to keep clear
of an outside leeward boat. A right-of-way boat may not be penalized under rule 14 unless
there is damage or injury.

WIND W1
COURSE TO
NEXT MARK
6 KNOTS
W2 L1
W6
MARK W3
L6 W4 L2
W5

L5 L3
L4

Facts and Decision of the Protest Committee

Two boats, 16 feet long, broad-reaching on starboard tack, were approaching a mark to be
left to starboard, the next leg being a beat. L established an outside overlap on W from clear
astern shortly before W reached the zone. As the boats rounded the mark, W bore away as a
consequence of poor seamanship, and L continued to yield in order to avoid contact until the
boats were three hull lengths beyond the mark. At that point beam to beam contact occurred
without damage or injury.
The protest committee disqualified W for breaking rule 11. W appealed.

January 2009 B-3