Sailboat collisions - Can responsibility be shared?

[Juho]

If the other boat managed to turn just before the collision and thereby make the collision less severe, I wonder if that could move the balance in favour of the other boat a bit. Kind of partial avoidance of collision.

[Jannie Radiance]

Originally Posted by BluJu

Question arising out of a recent sailing incident.

Context: My wife, 2 young kids and I are cruising in coastal nova scotia water. Beautiful afternoon, 10-12 kts of wind, sailing upwind on a port tack, all sails out including a large genoa which obstruct the view downwind from our center cockpit. My wife is playing games in the cockpit with the kids, I’m trimming sails, checking our route, keeping an eye on the AIS and a couple of sailboats in the vicinity that we’re pretending to race with. No obstacles to navigate around up to our destination.

At some point, we hear someone scream and see a boat coming from downwind that hits us on starboard. The skipper (alone onboard) had just enough time to fall off to avoid a more perpendicular collision. The other boat (J-boat in the 30 ft range) bounced off of us (steel boat) and glided along the aft section of the vessel. No injuries or structural damage on either side, a few scrapes and gelcoat cracks on the J-boat and a slightly dinted steel plate and superficial paint damage on ours.

After the incident, we rolled our genoa and steamed to the other boat. She was on a startboard tack and so I acknowledged that I was at fault. Clearly I did not see her coming and the other skipper acknowledged that he did not see us either until a few seconds before the hit. We exchanged numbers, and I told him to contact me once he decided how to proceed.

The owner contacted me earlier this week. He will have the repairs on his boat done at a local yard. The cost comes close to my/his insurance deductible and so we’ve discussed to sort it out without an insurance claim. Under his proposition, I would cover an amount equal to the deductible and he would cover the difference (~ 25% of the total amount). I should point out that I’m handling all repairs on my boat on my own (mostly for financial and logistical reasons).

I don’t deny responsibility, and honestly feel really embarrassed about this event which I can only attribute to negligence, but I would like to understand how this case would be looked at by insurance or lawyers. Two cruising (i.e. non-racing) sailboats not restricted by any navigational hazards (e.g. shipping lane, shoals, etc..) collide, with the boat having right-of-way (starboard tack) hitting the other boat. My understanding of the rules of navigation is that boats should always take all actions to avoid a collision, even if they have right-of-way. We clearly both failed to maintain a proper lookout (for that purpose I was technically also single-handling) so my question is to what degree the other skipper may be at least partially responsible?

Thanks for any advice/opinion you might have.

If this goes to a hearing , he may most likely have to assume more responsibility. I got away ONLY because I had boats to weather and leeward in a race and hailed like a madman. The hearing was still not unanimous on exclusive fault.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by StuM

Possibly Rule 2(b) is relevant to your situation:

Rule 2(b):
In construing and complying with these Rules due regard shall be had to all dangers of navigation and collision and to any special circumstances, including the limitations of the vessels involved, which may make a departure from these Rules necessary to avoid immediate danger.

Sure, but I don't think we should lightly go to Rule 2(b) and just deviate from the Rules, and especially not if we think that another vessel may be counting on our standing on.

It's really important to keep in mind that a core purpose of the Rules is to prevent two vessels from maneuvering at the same time. It's what all these guys who talk about "waiving" their "rights" to stand on just completely fail to see. So standing on is a CORE obligation under the Rules, not to be deviated from without an overwhelmingly good reason. And if you deviate from standing on right in the middle of the phase where the other vessel is probably going to make his own move -- I think you have to make passing arrangements. Even if you have a good 2(b) reason to leave off standing on, I don't think you can just do it -- I think you have to get on the radio and agree that you're going to alter course because of such and such a reason.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Jannie Radiance

If this goes to a hearing , he may most likely have to assume more responsibility. I got away ONLY because I had boats to weather and leeward in a race and hailed like a madman. The hearing was still not unanimous on exclusive fault.

Racing Rules of Sailing are very different to COLREGs.. The concept of "right of way" exists when racing, but not under COLREGs. i.e. there is no "stand-on" requirement.

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by robbievardon

Lodesman, Under British Admiralty Law Insurance Companies are not involved in aportioning blame. This is done by a High Court Judge sitting with 2 expert advisers. Their jurisdiction is not restricted to British waters. The recent case I was studying arose from a collision in the Middle East. Neither ship was British registered.

Not really my area of expertise, but I doubt the British High Court has jurisdiction everywhere. In Canada (as the OP apparently was), the Federal Court of Canada is the Admiralty Court. I imagine in a situation as described with fairly minor damage and some swapped paint, it may just come down to insurance companies duking it out in arbitration, but I only mentioned insurance companies, as Boatman indicated in his story that blame was apportioned by them.

Originally Posted by robbievardon

Lodesman,My question to you/everyone. True story but I was not on the ship, it was a friend.
Narrow channel approx half mile wide, bordered on Port and stb side by shallow water (20ft to 30ft) Both sides regularly used by yachtsmen up to boundary of channel. Ship proceeding up starboard side of channel yachts tacking back and forth up to imaginary boundary line. One yacht approx 15ft/18ft long ,with less than half mile ahead of ship decides to continue into the narrow channel at roughly right angles (course change) presumably to meet rule 10c! Having cleared the ships bow by a small margin it then turned to stb so as to fall within the arc of the stern light, not night time but easiest way to describe its course It then tacked back and forth up the channel. Apparently there was an element of Panic on the bridge briefly (no insult intended to the crew), hard astern called for to take off way, time limited by the effects of transverse thrust so I am interested to know who does what and when after that? I forgot to say the sailboat would disappear under the bows at times. Whether this was a disgruntled sailor proving in his mind that he had preference over power or he was just a bit crazy,who knows.

If I get the story right, a sailboat crossed close in front of a vessel constrained to the deep part of the channel, then turned to proceed in the same direction as the ship up the channel, but under sail tacking back and forth.

If that's correct, I'm gobsmacked. The ship should have sounded five short blasts immediately and repeated as necessary until the sailboat stopped impeding. If not actually impeding, the ship should have sounded the correct 34(c) signal and overtaken the sailboat.
If the sailboat had been on a steady course for some period before, then it could have fell to the ship to stay out of the way (rule 18), but if the sailboat changed course to turn into the channel a half-mile ahead of the ship, then the sailboat broke rule 2, in creating a risk of collision that had not existed previously.
Rule 10(c) doesn't apply in narrow channels, unless there was a TSS - was there?
Just as the rules say you can't turn an overtaking situation into a crossing situation, you can't do the reverse. More specifically, if the sailboat considered herself to be the stand on vessel, then she should have stood on, rather than altering course ahead of the ship - rule 17 infraction.

Ultimately any follow-up to this sort of situation would depend on where it happened. In many places, a report to the Coast Guard or other local authority would result in a "patrol boat" coming out and shepherding the WAFI out of the way.