Source: https://dwnsail.com.au/news/the-rule-quiz-26-04/
Timestamp: 2020-07-14 20:22:31
Document Index: 557029769

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 2', 'art 2', 'art 2', 'art2', 'art 2', 'art2', 'art 2']

The Rule Quiz 26-04
While a protest is the best way to establish that a boat broke a rule of Part 2, X is not required to protest Y. However, if X does protest Y after the incident that led to injury or physical damage and if the protest committee finds that Y did break a rule of Part 2, then clearly X can point to the outcome of her protest to establish that Y broke a rule of Part 2.
The Basic Principle, Sportsmanship and the Rules, states that all competitors, including X's crew, are expected to enforce the rules, but there is no racing rule that requires X to protest Y in order to be eligible for redress under rule62.1(b).
If X does not protest Y, her request for redress can succeed if evidence given during the redress hearing leads the protest committee to conclude that Y broke a rule of Part2. Here are examples of evidence that would lead a protest committee to that conclusion:
A member of Y's crew is called as a witness,and the protest committee concludes from evidence given by the witness that Y took a penalty in acknowledgement of breaking a rule of Part 2 in the incident with X.
A race official states that a representative of Y signed an acknowledgement of infringement or reported to a race official that Y took the appropriate penalty or retired from the race because she broke a rule of Part2 in the incident with X.
Any other evidence that leads the protest committee to conclude that Y broke a rule of Part 2 in the incident with X.