THIS SECTION MAY BE COMPLETED BY ANY JURY MEMBER
Comments on rule questions, new interpretations, problems, unpopular Rule 62 (Redress) decisions, summary of the facts, conclusions and decisions of Rule 69 (Allegations of Gross Misconduct) actions, problems with Sailing Instructions or Notice of Race and experience with experimental procedures.
A SI prevented 'requesting redress' over VHF OCS hails, but the RC realised that it had wrongly recalled two boats in the last race of the event. With the RC's support, the International Jury called a hearing to 'consider redress', which was attended by only one boat, a few minutes before the prizegiving. In deciding redress, it looked at the effect of simply deducting from elapsed time the additional time taken by each boat to return and start (again, and realised that this would result in a race result far better than achieved in any of the other races of the event. Noting also that the boat that attended the hearing had not started to return until a second recall hail (having assumed that she had misheard the first), the jury reduced the time deducted to a value that came closer to an 'average points' outcome. (Because of this distinction between a request for redress (rules 60.1(b) and 60.2(b) and consideration of redress (rule 60.3(b), the rule 60.3(b) hearings are not included in statistics for requests for redress.)
When running downwind at 11 knots towards the end of a long offshore race, a boat started her engine to recharge her battery. The lever was in full reverse, and she lost her propeller. The International Jury learned of this from her request to haul out to replace it, protested her and gave a small DPI reflecting her gain against her rating of not having a propeller for many miles of the race.
The ORC standard SIs included a requirement for boats intending to lodge a protest to notify the race committee after finishing of the identity of the protestee. Several protests had to be found invalid because of this on the first day.
Arbitration was available (SCP 30%), but only accepted once.
Ner of classes: 3
Entries: 60
Ner of Countries represented: 8
Ner of Races sailed: 8
Ner of requests for redress: 1
Ner of requests for redress for OCS: 0
Ner of requests for OCS granted: 0
Total number of hearings: 20
Total number of arbitrations: 1
Number of % penalties: 30
To be completed only if Appendix P was applied.
Number of First Penalties (Appendix P2.1): 0
Number of Second Penalties (Appendix P2.2): 0
Number of Third Penalties (Appendix P2.3): 0
P2.3 Subsequent Penalties: 0
Event:
Avantime ORC European Championships
Date Event Started
3 August 2013
Event Location:
Sandhamn , SWE
Group Event belongs:
G - Scandinavia
Jury Chairman's name:
Trevor Lewis
Jury chairman's email:
tl@tlfs.org.uk
Judge submitting report:
Trevor Lewis
Email of judge submitting report:
tl@tlfs.org.uk
PRO at event :
Eckard Reinke
PRO sailorID and status:
GERER5 ( IRO )
Email of PRO:
E.Reinke@post.harvard.edu
Was this an International Jury Panel ?
No
Please name each judge (including the chairman) and their country and IJ or NJ certification. one per line
Jury as appointed:
Trevor Lewis IJ GBR GBRTL19
Zoran Grubisa IJ CRO CROZG2
Aina Hellman Jurander IJ SWE SWEAH5
Tom Schubert IJ FIN*
Eva Andersson IJ SWE*
The asterisked IJs were then not available under rule N1.5. With the consent of the organizing authority, they were replaced by one SWE NJ (Anders Rosen SWEAR5 for the start of the week, Bengt A Eklund SWEBEUnk6 for the end of the week,to maintain compliance with rule N1.3.
Jury as appointed:
Trevor Lewis IJ GBR GBRTL19
Zoran Grubisa IJ CRO CROZG2
Aina Hellman Jurander IJ SWE SWEAH5
Tom Schubert IJ FIN*
Eva Andersson IJ SWE*
The asterisked IJs were then not available under rule N1.5. With the consent of the organizing authority, they were replaced by one SWE NJ (Anders Rosen SWEAR5 for the start of the week, Bengt A Eklund SWEBEUnk6 for the end of the week,to maintain compliance with rule N1.3.
