I think this is very confusing as  it really is using a term and stretching it out of the context it started in.
So yes as RRS 14 is in Part 2 it is in there.
How is it applied? I see this as the problem because you only get room when the rule says so, so if you under a rule are entitled to room it includes space to comply with RRS 14.
However if at the time you do not have a rule entitling you to room, then you cannot cite RRS 14 and say magically you are entitled to room to avoid a boat.

Michael, thanks for the reply.

It was not my intent to imply that RRS 14 creates room privilege on it's own (I don't think I did that in my question).  It is only AFTER room is granted by a separate rule that you start determining "..the space a boat needs .." .. and RRS 14 doesn't grant room itself.

Sorry if that wasn't clear in my question's premise.  I'll tweak the wording a bit to make that clearer.

Ang

The rules of the game intent to avoid a contact between boats, especially when damage or injury exist.
Case 63 shows rule 14 limitation.
Sony 

Juan, Case 63  is an interesting reference for this question as one parses the last couple sentences of the Decision .. and it's one I missed! :-).

I'll return the favor and toss out Q3 and Q4 of Case 114 and MR Call D1

Ang

Wondering why Case 114 Q1 refers to A's obligation to B to give room to C (inside), when C deserves mark room from A in her own right?
(B was overlapped between C inside and A outside when A reached the zone first.)
Is it simply an example of a poor case making for good law?

The challenge I think, for those in the "included camp", is to imagine a scenario in which RRS 14 is the rule that is significantly shaping the room that a boat is entitled to from another rule application.  

In other words, imagine a scenario where one boat is entitled to room from another boat under a rule not RRS 14 (because as Michael pointed out, RRS 14 does not entitle a boat to room)

If you can always accomplish #2 above, could the answer to my original question be ..???

          Yes, RRS 14 is part of a boat's obligations under Part 2, but there aren't any scenarios in which RRS 14 shapes "the space a boat needs" that can't be explained through the application of other rules.

Second sentence of 24.2?

Philip, the non-interference rule doesn't really address the subtlety I'm attempting to explore.

This latest thought-experiment (my latest rabbit-hole) was spawned from a decision I recently wrote.

There were unique characteristics of that situation which, at first,  I had included a boat's RRS 14's "obligations" into the room that boat was already entitled to under RRS 18 and/or RRS 11.  In other words, I had a boat's RRS 14 "obligations" influencing the size and character of the room she was entitled to, already granted from under another rule.

I worked with an experienced Judge on that decision and he pointed out to me (after quite a bit of Socratic learning on my part, and patience on his) that, in that particular situation, my referencing RRS 14 was unnecessary and I could get the same room for that boat without it.

So, I asked myself, "Would that always be the case?" ...

I started trying to invent and imagine scenarios where referring to RRS 14's obligations, within the room entitled by a separate rule, would be necessary.  I don't think I've come-up with a solid scenario yet .. so I thought I'd put it out to the forum to see if folk out there can come up with one and get their input on if/how they have applied RRS 14's obligations into already-entitled room.

I'm not suggesting anything is wrong with the RRS 14 or "room" ... just trying to figure out the characteristics of scenarios to keep an eye out for in the future .. if they even exist.

Ang

Looks like the new Case 146, for the first time as far as I can tell, explicitly references RRS 14 in the Part 2 obligations shaping ‘room’.

2nd sentence, 3rd paragraph in the Decision.

https://www.racingrulesofsailing.org/cases/1454?page=15

‘Room’ is the space W needed to keep clear of L while also complying with her obligations under the rules of Part 2, which includes rule 14, and rule 31. See Case 114.