Rule M7: APPEALS (rule 70 and Appendix R)

Section M — Recommendations For Protest Committees

This appendix is advisory only; in some circumstances changing these procedures may be advisable. It is addressed primarily to the protest committee chair but may also help judges, protest committee secretaries, race committees and others involved in hearings.

In a hearing, the protest committee should weigh all testimony with equal care; should recognize that honest testimony can vary, and even be in conflict, as a result of different observations and recollections; should resolve such differences as best it can; should recognize that no boat or competitor is guilty until a breach of a rule has been established to the satisfaction of the protest committee; and should keep an open mind until all the evidence has been heard as to whether a boat or competitor has broken a rule.

APPEALS (rule 70 and Appendix R)

When decisions can be appealed,

(a) retain the papers relevant to the hearing so that the information can easily be used for an appeal. Is there a diagram endorsed or prepared by the protest committee? Are the facts found sufficient? (Example: Was there an overlap? Yes or No. ‘Perhaps’ is not a fact found.) Are the names of the protest committee members and other important information on the form?
(b) comments by the protest committee on any appeal should enable the appeals committee to picture the whole incident clearly; the appeals committee knows nothing about the situation.

Section M — Recommendations For Protest Committees

APPEALS (rule 70 and Appendix R)

When decisions can be appealed,

(a) retain the papers relevant to the hearing so that the information can easily be used for an appeal. Is there a diagram endorsed or prepared by the protest committee? Are the facts found sufficient? (Example: Was there an overlap? Yes or No. ‘Perhaps’ is not a fact found.) Are the names of the protest committee members and other important information on the form?
(b) comments by the protest committee on any appeal should enable the appeals committee to picture the whole incident clearly; the appeals committee knows nothing about the situation.