Situation 1
Two 40-feet boats, A and B, are on a collision course in strong wind and waves. The two mast tops collide and the keep-clear boat dismasts. A, the right-of-way boat, stops to assess any damage to her rig, and after a while she continues racing at normal speed.

After the race, A requests redress for the time and positions lost while checking the rig. The protest committee found as a fact that B broke a rule of Part 2, but A did not (including rule 14).

Question 1
Does the time A need to assess any damage in order to ensure it is safe to continue racing qualify as physical damage under rule 62.1(b)?

Answer 1
No.

Situation 2
The situation is the same as in Situation 1, except that there is damage to A’s rig and she stops and repairs the damage before continuing racing in a safe and seamanlike way.

Question 2
Does the time A needs to repair the damage entitle A to redress under rule 62.1(b)?

Answer 2
If the damage to A’s mast was caused by an action of B in which B was breaking a rule of Part 2, then rule 62.1(b) applies. However, boat A would be entitled to redress only if the time A needed to repair the damage made her score significantly worse, and at the same time the other requirements of rule 62 were met.

Situation 3
The situation starts as in Situation 1, but A does not stop to assess or repair any possible damage. The mast on A breaks shortly afterwards, causing the boat to retire from the race.

Question 3
One of the requirements for a boat to be given redress is that what happened was 'through no fault of her own', Will A meet that requirement, considering that she continued racing without neither checking for damage nor repairing after having rig contact?

Answer 3
The protest committee must evaluate the total situation and decide whether A is at fault. Unless A is at fault, the protest committee should find that the damage to A’s mast was a direct result of the actions of B, and not A’s fault. See Answer 1.

Situation 4
The situation is similar to Situation 1, but the boats are high performance dinghies. The boats collide. The right-of-way boat (Boat A) did not break any rule. The collision causes a shock cord holding the trapeze in place on A to break. The design of the boat is such that the trapeze can not be used without the shock cord. A stops and repairs the damage before continuing racing at full speed.

Question 4
Does the time A needs to repair the damage qualify as physical damage under rule 62.1(b)?

Answer 4
Yes. There was damage to A (her trapeze rigging), and this was a direct result of the collision with B and not caused through any fault of A. The damage referred to in rule 62.1(b) does not have to be serious damage. However, before making a decision about redress, the protest committee must determine whether or not A’s finishing position was made significantly worse by the time spent on repairing the damage.

Situation 5
The situation starts as in Situation 4, but this time A does not stop, but rather continues racing with the damage. On the way to the finish the boat capsizes several times as a result of the inability to use the trapeze. The protest committee concludes that the boat lost more positions than she would have done if she instead had stopped to repair the damage.

Question 5
Could the time loss caused by subsequent capsize be considered as 'through no fault of her own', when the boat was sailing on in a damaged condition instead of stopping to assess and repair any damage?

Answer 5
It depends upon the evidence presented to the protest committee. The damage to A's trapeze rigging was a direct result of the collision with B and was not caused through any fault of A. In this case the protest committee needs to find out what options A had; determine to what degree her position was made worse by the damage caused by B and also how that damage was affected by the option she chose.