Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 
Old 17 December 2005, 17:48   #31
Member
 
Richard B's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Devon
Boat name: White Ice
Make: Ranieri
Length: 5m +
Engine: Suzuki 115hp
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,015
Interesting to observe that he pleaded guilty to the original charge.
__________________

Richard B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2005, 18:12   #32
RIBnet admin team
 
Poly's Avatar
 
Country: UK - Scotland
Boat name: imposter
Make: FunYak
Length: 3m +
Engine: 2 stroke YAM 20 HP
MMSI: 235089819
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard B
Interesting to observe that he pleaded guilty to the original charge.
Richard, my understanding (I have been following this for a few months) is that:

He doesn't deny causing the accident.
His lawyers initially contested that a PWC was not a ship and therefore he had not broken the Merchant Shipping Act.
The Judge at the trial was asked to make a judgement. Since the Judge decided a PWC was a ship, he pled guilty.

The appeal looked at the validity of the decision by the Judge that a PWC is a ship. The appeal is summarised here:

http://www.lawreports.co.uk/WLRD/2005/CACRIM/dec0.1.htm

The act defines a ship as "every description of vessel used in navigation" the confusion seems to be whether a PWC is used in navigation (the accepted meaning seeming to involve travelling from one place to another), although you will note the ruling is more extensive and seems to be attempting to apply the act really only to commercial vessels.

There may be other legislation he has broken, e.g. if he killed someone it would be manslaughter. Presumably since there was a collision he did break the col. regs.

Neil
__________________
Poly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2005, 18:22   #33
Member
 
Country: UK - Wales
Town: swansea
Boat name: Too Blue
Make: BLANK
Length: 8m +
Engine: Suzuki DT225
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,791
That is a good link - and the comments made by the judge make a lot of sense!!!

For a start they come under the "Merchant shipping act" - how the hell could that cover a jetski???
__________________
codprawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2005, 19:19   #34
DJL
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Make: Ribcraft 6.5
Length: 6m +
Engine: Suzuki DF175TG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 929
I can’t believe that you think that PWCs shouldn’t be covered by the Merchant Shipping Act.

Its not uncommon for a modern PWC to weigh close to half a ton, be capable of speeds around 40 mph and to be powered by 100+ HP engines. Not much different to a small RIB really.

Surely Codprawn you would agree that a PWC is a potentially dangerous piece of equipment?

I certainly would, and I don’t think its particularly unreasonable for someone in charge of a PWC to “prevent his ship from causing the loss or destruction of or serious damage to any other ship or any structure, or the death of or serious injury to any person not on board his ship” as required by the Merchant Shipping Act.
__________________
DJL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2005, 20:13   #35
Member
 
Doug Stormforce's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: Southampton
Boat name: Yoda & Obi Wan
Make: Valiant 750 & XS600
Length: 7m +
Engine: 150, 115 HP
MMSI: Various
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,031
The merchant shipping act defines a vesel as

Every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water

The MCA defines a vessel as

any contrivance used or capable of being used for navigation upon water, whether or not capable of self-propulsion, including foreign and domestic vessels engaged in commerce upon the waters of this State, passenger or other cargo carrying vessels, privately owned recreational watercraft or any other floating craft

Seems quite clear to me a surfboard, a PWC, a raft are all vessels
__________________
STORMFORCE COACHING
web - www.stormforce.biz
email - coaching@stormforce.biz
tel - 02380 231122
Doug Stormforce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2005, 20:17   #36
Member
 
Country: UK - England
Town: knebworth
Boat name: phoenix
Make: xs
Length: 6m +
Engine: 115 opti
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 193
Send a message via MSN to mark-f Send a message via Skype™ to mark-f
[QUOTE=codprawn] I think to compare it to a vessel they should look at the other kinds of vessel out there.

Personally I think that a jetski has far more in common with a canoe than an oil tanker.


me thinks if it has an engine and is capable of planning speeds a pwc is a powerboats simple as that, does not mater how small it is
__________________
mark-f is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2005, 20:30   #37
RIBnet admin team
 
Nos4r2's Avatar
 
Country: UK - England
Town: The wilds of Wiltshire
Boat name: WhiteNoise/Dominator
Make: Ballistic 7.8/SR5.4
Length: 7m +
Engine: Opti 225/Yam 85
MMSI: 235090687/235055163
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 12,645
RIBase
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Stormforce
The merchant shipping act defines a vesel as

Every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water

The MCA defines a vessel as

any contrivance used or capable of being used for navigation upon water, whether or not capable of self-propulsion, including foreign and domestic vessels engaged in commerce upon the waters of this State, passenger or other cargo carrying vessels, privately owned recreational watercraft or any other floating craft

Seems quite clear to me a surfboard, a PWC, a raft are all vessels
Hell, from that description a skip is a vessel...why should jetskis be exempt?!
__________________
Need spares,consoles,consumables,hire,training or even a new boat?

Please click HERE and HERE and support our Trade Members.

Join up as a Trade member or Supporter HERE
Nos4r2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 December 2005, 23:36   #38
Member
 
Country: UK - Wales
Town: swansea
Boat name: Too Blue
Make: BLANK
Length: 8m +
Engine: Suzuki DT225
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 12,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJL
I can’t believe that you think that PWCs shouldn’t be covered by the Merchant Shipping Act.

Its not uncommon for a modern PWC to weigh close to half a ton, be capable of speeds around 40 mph and to be powered by 100+ HP engines. Not much different to a small RIB really.

Surely Codprawn you would agree that a PWC is a potentially dangerous piece of equipment?

I certainly would, and I don’t think its particularly unreasonable for someone in charge of a PWC to “prevent his ship from causing the loss or destruction of or serious damage to any other ship or any structure, or the death of or serious injury to any person not on board his ship” as required by the Merchant Shipping Act.

Well obviously the judge is as wrong as I am!!!

Seriously though the MAIn point I think people are missing is the term "MERCHANT" which basically means commercial.

For a ship to come under the merchant shipping act it has to be registered as a commercial ship and comply with all the regs - would be funny seeing a jetski flying the red duster!!!
__________________
codprawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 December 2005, 06:10   #39
RIBnet admin team
 
Poly's Avatar
 
Country: UK - Scotland
Boat name: imposter
Make: FunYak
Length: 3m +
Engine: 2 stroke YAM 20 HP
MMSI: 235089819
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by codprawn
Seriously though the MAIn point I think people are missing is the term "MERCHANT" which basically means commercial.

For a ship to come under the merchant shipping act it has to be registered as a commercial ship and comply with all the regs
This is NOT true. The definition of a ship does not require it to be registerred or opperated commercially.
__________________
Poly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 18 December 2005, 06:34   #40
RIBnet admin team
 
Poly's Avatar
 
Country: UK - Scotland
Boat name: imposter
Make: FunYak
Length: 3m +
Engine: 2 stroke YAM 20 HP
MMSI: 235089819
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Stormforce
The merchant shipping act defines a vesel as

Every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water
I don't think so, the act: (the Merchant Shipping Act 1995 (c. 21) ) which is what the prosecution was brought about under:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1995...50021_en_1.htm

This doesn't define the term vessel. It also doesn't make it "illegal" to use a vessel dangerously. IT DOES MAKE IT ILLEGAL TO USE A SHIP DANGEROUSLY. And the term SHIP is defined (as described in the link or my earlier email).

I think the definition you gave for a vessel from the Merchant Shipping Act, may be the definition used in the US act?

The nature of the law is that it is (usually) very specific, and clearly constructed so that it is enforcable. So it doesn't matter if everybody thinks a PWC is a ship - if the Act says a ship has to be used for Navigation and a PWC is not being "navigated" from one place to another then they are not covered by the Act.

I have heard of a few PWC's being used to make trips from A to B so they could still be covered. (I think there is also a tenuous argument that if you take a PWC 100 yards off shore and back again you have navigated it to do so). Its not clear to me that just because someone else navigates a PWC that all PWC are covered.

Interestingly if you have a small rib that you only use to muck about in local waters in (e.g. toobing etc) then it is probably also excluded from the act. But if you ever make a journey from a to b then I think it is different.

And Codprawn - if a RIB is included then a sea kayak almost certainly is too, as it is navigated from A to B.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Stormforce
Seems quite clear to me a surfboard, a PWC, a raft are all vessels
I agree - and I think it SHOULD be illegal to cause or negligently risk causing injury through the misuse of any of these - or a RIB, just as it would with an oil tanker. Do we need new legislation - i wouldn't have thought so - presumably there is already legislation on land which prevents me from doing bloody stupid things likely to harm others?

Anyway thats enough rambling for now...

NEIL
__________________
Poly is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 16:28.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.