Interpreting ColRegs

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Does it ??

You're entitled to your opinion, but it does not agree with that of the elder brethren.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Just to confirm, the Colregs really only come into effect when a collision occurs?

There is (I have always assumed) no penalty for just failing to meet them on your average incident free day of sailing unlike say offenses under the traffic act where you must obey the speed limit, red light or whatever at all times.

You've missed the poster's meaning - legal interpretations usually occur after an accident; but the rules apply at all times. You can be prosecuted for breaking the rules, but that's dependent on the prosecuting authority having jurisdiction and catching you in the act. You can complain to the relevant authorities if you see someone breaking the Rules, but whether it's investigated and will lead to charges is probably highly contingent on the corroborating evidence you provide. As you can imagine, a near miss doesn't leave a lot of evidence.

[Laidback]

Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and or the risk of collision.

Ignor the as well as ".....................................>>>>>"

Still comes down to 24/7 SHALL maintain a proper LOOK-OUT by SIGHT and HEARING. If this rule is not observed to the letter - it is being Broken.

[jackdale]

I asked a friend who with the Office of Safe Boating about enforcing rules like anchor balls and inverted cones. He relied only after an incident that ends up in the judicial system..

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Pyxis156

............. I guess the bigger question here is if you rig the NUC signals, does that excuse you from following other regulations like having to keep watch?

Originally Posted by Lodesman

No. You're still expected to maintain a lookout as a NUC vessel. ..............

Originally Posted by jackdale

I found this page from Cockcroft re:NUC

TinyURL.com - shorten that long URL into a tiny URL

Dragging anchor is NUC
Sailboat becalmed is NUC
Broken down engine is NUC
Rudder failure is NUC

All of these are beyond the control of the vessel's crew.

This may be jumping ahead a bit but what does NUC really mean?
No crew on board?
No one "in command" on board?
Vessel unable to manoeuvre?
What is the point of keeping a watch if the vessel is NUC (and thus assuming) can't take any action to avoid a collision?

[bewitched]

Originally Posted by Wotname

This may be jumping ahead a bit but what does NUC really mean?
No crew on board?
No one "in command" on board?
Vessel unable to manoeuvre?
What is the point of keeping a watch if the vessel is NUC (and thus assuming) can't take any action to avoid a collision?

NUC = Not Under Command. A vessel cannot that be manouvred? (properly?) - a step worse than limited in its ability to manouvre?

But it doesn't mean you can't do anything -if you believe there is a risk of a collission, surely you'd get on the radio? Draw attention to yourself with light / sound?

Can't do that if you're asleep and not keeping a watch

[Wotname]

Well so far the single hander is violating rule 5 when asleep; not entitled to be consider NUC -because of watch keeping requirements for NUC - so how about considering the vessel is abandoned while he/she is alseep - which effectively it is except for the sense of hearing which remains reasonably active while one is asleep.

[Wotname]

By the way, thanks to all for the conversation about rule 5 etc - I will be bowing out for a few weeks as I will be offshore (working - not sailing) and out of internet range.

[hummingway]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

You've missed the poster's meaning - legal interpretations usually occur after an accident; but the rules apply at all times. You can be prosecuted for breaking the rules, but that's dependent on the prosecuting authority having jurisdiction and catching you in the act. You can complain to the relevant authorities if you see someone breaking the Rules, but whether it's investigated and will lead to charges is probably highly contingent on the corroborating evidence you provide. As you can imagine, a near miss doesn't leave a lot of evidence.

I looked into this since it is an interesting question. For anything to be law across Canada the federal government would have to pass legislation and sure enough they have. The rules that apply are the Collision Regulations. CanLII - Collision Regulations, C.R.C., c. 1416

I din't see any mention of any action occuring as a result of not following the regulations so I would think that you you couldn't be charged with anything from the regulations but from another law if it was applied and these are the standards for applying the law?

With regard to compliance they say this:

COMPLIANCE

4. The following persons shall ensure that the applicable requirements of sections 5 and 6 and of the Rules set out in Schedule 1 are met:
(a) the authorized representative of a vessel and the master of a Canadian vessel;
(b) the owner, the charterer and the operator of a pleasure craft or seaplane and the person in charge of a pleasure craft or seaplane; and
(c) the owner of an ODAS.
SOR/90-702, s. 3; SOR/2008-272, s. 6.

[nigel1]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Just to confirm, the Colregs really only come into effect when a collision occurs?

There is (I have always assumed) no penalty for just failing to meet them on your average incident free day of sailing unlike say offenses under the traffic act where you must obey the speed limit, red light or whatever at all times.

There have been a couple of recent cases in UK courts, where the skippers of sailing vessels were prosecuted for failing to comply with Rule 10. Both casre I think occurred in the Dover Strait/English Channel TSS, and invloved the sailing vessel using the traffic lane but proceeding against the traffic flow. Both resulted in quite severe fines for the skippers.

[Lodesman]

Hummingway, the enabling statute of the colregs in Canada is the CSA - this is Transport Canada's stance: Canada Shipping Act, 2001 Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations - Backgrounders - Backgrounders, Reports and Info Sheets - Media Room - Transport Canada

Transport Canada will still be able to lay charges against anyone who does not comply with the CSA 2001 or its regulations. This will occur only in serious offences. The CSA 2001 gives the department the right to issue Administrative Monetary Penalties for contraventions of the legislation.

This is a review of an actual case, topically enough it has to do with the master not having sufficient crew employed: Decisions

[jackdale]

Lodesman

Thanks for that posting. I found the next paragraph interesting:

The Administrative Monetary Penalties Regulations are new to the marine sector. They set up a penalty system that will apply to all vessel types except pleasure craft. (Note: A pleasure craft can be penalized with an Administrative Monetary Penalty [AMP] for environmental violation.)

So what is the penalty system for pleasure craft? The Contraventions Act?

Jack

[hummingway]

It would appear that poor seamanship with regard to Pleasure Craft isn't punishable unless there is a spill or some such?

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by jackdale

So what is the penalty system for pleasure craft? The Contraventions Act?

I assume so. As you know it's the police that do most of the enforcement with regard to pleasure boats. Contraventions Regulations

[Dockhead]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wotname
Just to confirm, the Colregs really only come into effect when a collision occurs?

There is (I have always assumed) no penalty for just failing to meet them on your average incident free day of sailing unlike say offenses under the traffic act where you must obey the speed limit, red light or whatever at all times.

Originally Posted by Lodesman

You've missed the poster's meaning - legal interpretations usually occur after an accident; but the rules apply at all times. You can be prosecuted for breaking the rules, but that's dependent on the prosecuting authority having jurisdiction and catching you in the act. You can complain to the relevant authorities if you see someone breaking the Rules, but whether it's investigated and will lead to charges is probably highly contingent on the corroborating evidence you provide. As you can imagine, a near miss doesn't leave a lot of evidence.

Well, there is a very clear legal question here. He means -- do the Colregs merely govern rights and obligations between ships (captains, owners)? Or between ships (captains, owners) and some government or body which has power to enforce them? In other words, are they merely civil in character or also criminal or administrative?

My understanding is that they are both -- liability in case of an accident, of one ship (captain, owner) to another, is determined with reference to them. And states who have adopted them as law or policy can enforce them, too -- i.e., can punish violations.