Forum: The Racing Rules of Sailing

What is the difference between alleged and actual breaches of RRS?

Myrto Antonopoulou
Nationality: Greece
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training

According Rules 5, 6, 7: An alleged or actual breach of these rules shall be dealt with under the relevant Regulations. It shall not be grounds for a protest and Rule 63.1 does not apply. Furthermore, according Rule 60.1: A boat may protest another boat, but not for an alleged breach of a Rule of Part 2 or Rule 31, unless she was involved in or saw the incident.

What is the meaning of “an alleged breach”? Could we assume, given the wording of the Rule, that a boat may protest another boat for an actual breach of a Rule of Part 2 or Rule 31? And what could an actual breach of these Rules be?

Furthermore, according Rule 60.5: Neither a boat nor a committee may protest for an alleged breach of Rule 5, 6, 7 or 69.

Since Rules 5, 6, 7 already clearly state that Rule 63.1 does not apply for alleged or actual breaches of these Rules, is the relevant sentence in Rule 60.5, which refers only to alleged breaches, really necessary?

Created: 18-Nov-17 07:51

Comments

Baptiste Verniest
Nationality: France
Certifications:
  • Regional Umpire
  • Regional Race Officer
  • International Judge
3
Protest committees decide whether a rule has been broken. Before that, the breach is alleged. When we're reaching the particulars codes of rules 5, 6 and 7, RRS state alleged and actual because these codes provide for hearing procedures and deciding whether the rules of those codes have been broken, as well as provisions on sanctions. When someone reports a corruption case, it shall be heard under Reg 37 to decide whether there has been corruption. If there has been, then you have to follow Reg 37 as to the sanctions. You can't use rule 64 to take a decision on such case.

For "regular" rules, you have an alleged breach before a hearing, then when you've decided you actually have a breach, then you take a decision under the RRS.

Rule 60.5 is here to prevent a hearing under the RRS, because such case has to be dealt with under WS Regulations. For rule 69, it is similar: you're not conducting a hearing under the provisions of rule 63 but 69 (and eventually Reg 35): not the "usual" way.
Created: 18-Nov-17 15:21
Myrto Antonopoulou
Nationality: Greece
Certifications:
  • Judge In Training
0
Baptiste Verniest,

thank you for the accurate and descriptive answer.

Created: 18-Nov-17 16:03
[You must be signed in to add a comment]