CASE 95

Rule 18.1, Rounding and Passing Marks and Obstructions: When this Rule Applies
Rule 18.3, Rounding and Passing Marks and Obstructions: Tacking at a mark

Rule 18 applies when both boats are about to pass a mark or obstruction. If the boats are on the same tack approaching a windward mark, and the outside boat tacks, rule 18 does not apply, even if both boats are now about to pass the mark, since they are now on opposite tacks. If the other boat then tacks, she is subject to rule 18.3.

Summary of the Facts
Approaching the windward mark, Jagga and Freebird were overlapped on port tack, Freebird being between one and two boat-lengths to leeward. Freebird tacked. Jagga then tacked. Freebird became overlapped to leeward. Jagga luffed so that her swinging stern required Freebird to change course to avoid contact, which she did, touching the mark as a result. Freebird protested.

The protest committee disqualified Jagga under rule 18.3(b). Jagga appealed on the grounds that, as an inside overlapped boat, she was entitled to room to pass the mark.

Decision
The appeal is dismissed.
In position 1 rule 18 did not apply because Freebird was not yet about to round the mark. After she tacked rule 18 still did not apply because the boats were on opposite tacks (see rule 18.1(b)). Jagga’s claim to room to pass the mark was therefore groundless because during the time she was an inside overlapped boat rule 18 did not apply. When Jagga turned past head to wind during her tack, both boats were on starboard tack and therefore rule 18 began to apply at that time. Because Jagga completed her tack inside the two-length zone and because Freebird was fetching the mark at that time, 18.3 applied and it also made all of rule 18.2 inapplicable.
When Freebird became overlapped on the inside, Jagga was immediately required to keep clear under rule 11. She also had no protection from rule 15 because rule 18.3(b) made it inapplicable. Rule 11 and the definition Keep Clear required Jagga to sail so that Freebird could ‘sail her course with no need to take avoiding action’. The fact that Freebird had to change course to avoid contact was evidence that Jagga did not keep clear and did not give Freebird room as required by rule 18.3(b). The protest committee correctly disqualified Jagga under rule 18.3(b) but she is also disqualified under rule 11. Although Freebird broke rule 31.1 in touching the mark, she is exonerated under rule 64.1(b).

RYA 2000/4