COLREG 1972, A Presentation

COLREG 1972
Capt. Amarinder Singh Brar
LLM Maritime Law (2014-2015), University of Southampton

COLREG - History
• For several hundred years, rules were in existence but with no statutory force.
• 18th Century - Regulations for Sailing Vessels.
• 1840 - Trinity House (London) drew up a set of rules (Steam vessels).
• 1846 - Enacted as an Act of Parliament.
• Above two combined in Steam Navigation Act of 1846.
• 1848 - Admiralty Regulations concerning navigation lights added to Steam Navigation Act 1846.
• 1858 - Colored side lights prescribed, Fog signals prescribed.
• 1863 - New set of regulations drawn up by British Board of Trade, in consultation with French Government
• 1864 – 1863 Regulations adopted by over 30 maritime countries.
• 1884 - 1863 regulations amended. No significant difference.
• 1889 - Maritime conference in Washington initiated by government of the United States.
• 1910 - Minor differences in above accepted internationally at Brussels - In force till 1954.
• 1929 - SOLAS proposed minor amendments. Never adopted.

COLREG - 1960 to 1972 Regulations
By 1965 it was felt necessary for a thorough revision to take account of
developments in navigation such as:
• the widespread acceptance and use of radar,
• the introduction of traffic separation, and
• the increase in size and speed of many ships.
• In October 1972, a conference was held which brought in substantial
changes and a new format to the Regulations.

COLREG 1972 - Introduction
• Convention on International Regulation for Preventing Collisions at
Sea, 1972, as amended.
• Adopted - 20 Oct 1972; Entered in force - 15 July 1977
• Replaces COLREGS 1960 which entered in force with the SOLAS
Convention at that time.
• Amended in 1981, 1987, 1989, 1993, 2001, 2007
• Also known as 'Rules of the Road', often abbreviated to ROR.

Structure of COLREG 72
• 38 Rules divided into 5 parts
• 4 Annexes containing technical details

Rules in COLREG 72
(38 Rules divided into 5 parts)
• Part A - General
• Part B - Steering and Sailing Rules
• Section I - Conduct of vessels in any condition of visibility
• Section II - Conduct of vessels when in sight of one another
• Section III - Conduct of vessels in Restricted Visibility
• Part C - Lights and Shapes
• Part D - Sound and Light Signals
• Part E - Exemptions

Annexes of COLREG 72
Four Annexes. Namely:
• Annex 1 - Positioning and technical details of lights and shapes
• Annex 2 - Additional signals for FV fishing in close proximity
• Annex 3 - Technical details of sound signaling appliances
• Annex 4 - Distress Signals

Part A - General
• Rule 1 - Application
• Rule 2 - Responsibility
• Rule 3 - Definitions

Rule 1 - Application
(a) These rules shall apply to all vessels upon the high seas and in all waters connected therewith navigable by
seagoing vessels.
(b) Nothing in these Rules shall interfere with the operation of special rules made by an appropriate authority
for roadsteads, harbours, rivers, lakes, or inland waterways connected with the high seas and navigable by
seagoing vessels. Such special rules shall conform as closely as possible to these Rules.
(c) Nothing in these Rules shall interfere with the operation of any special rule made by the government of any
State with respect to additional station or signal lights, shapes or whistle signals for ships of war and vessels
proceeding under convoy, or with respect to additional station or signal lights or shapes for fishing vessels
engaged in fishing as a fleet. These additional station or signal lights, shapes or whistle signals shall, so far as
possible, be such that they cannot be mistaken for any light, shape, or signal authorised elsewhere under these
Rules
(d) Traffic separation schemes may be adopted by the Organization for the purpose of these Rules.
(e) Whenever the Government concerned shall have determined that a vessel of any special construction or
purpose cannot comply with the provisions of any of these Rules with respect to the number, position, range,
or arc of visibility of lights or shapes, as well as to the disposition and characteristics of sound-signalling
appliances, such vessel shall comply with such other provisions in regard to the number, position, range or arc
of visibility of lights or shapes, as well as to the disposition and characteristics of sound-signalling appliances,
as her Government shall have determined to be the closest possible compliance with these Rules in respect of
that vessel.

Rule 1 – Application - Comment
a) Applicable to all vessels. Applicable upon the high seas and in all
navigable waters connected therewith.
b) Local authorities can make local navigation rules. Should be similar to
these rules.
e.g. Inland rues in United States of America
c) Special rule can be made by the government of any State for specific
lights or signal.
e.g. Special signal requirement in the Straits of Singapore
d) Rules apply in adopted TSS which can be found in IMO Guide to Ship
Routeing.
e) Exceptions allowed based upon specific nature of work or construction of
particular vessel.
e.g. Navigation lights on Aircraft Carriers and submarines.

Rule 2 - Responsibility
(a) Nothing in these Rules shall exonerate any vessel, or the owner,
master or crew thereof, from the consequences of any neglect to
comply with these Rules or of the neglect of any precaution which may
be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or by the special
circumstances of the case.
(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.

Rule 2 – Responsibility - Comment
• Rule 2 is sometimes referred to as the "General Prudential" rule.
• Mariner has two fold duty:
1. To comply with rules, and
2. To prevent collision.
• Paramount to avoid or minimise the damaging effects of a collision, as
opposed to blindly following the rules to the letter.
• Overall intent to minimise actual collision taking place rather than rule
compliance.
• A departure is only permitted when there are special circumstances and
there is immediate danger.
• The departure must be of such a nature as to avoid the danger which
threatens.

Rule 2 – Responsibility – Case Law
• Duty to depart if necessary – not only justified but also expected -
Tasmania-City of Corinth (Lord Herschell, 1890).

Rule 3 – Definitions (Excerpt)
(a) The word “vessel” includes every description of water craft,
including non-displacement craft, wing-in-ground-effect (WIG)
vehicle, and seaplanes, used or capable of being used as a
means of transportation on water.
(b) The term "power-driven vessel" means any vessel propelled by
machinery.
(c) The term "sailing vessel" means any vessel under sail provided
that propelling machinery, if fitted, is not being used.
(d) The term "vessel engaged in fishing" means any vessel fishing
with nets, lines, trawls or other fishing apparatus which restrict
manoeuvrability, but does not include a vessel fishing with
trolling lines or other fishing apparatus which do not restrict
manoeuvrability.
(e) The word "seaplane" includes any aircraft designed to
manoeuvre on the water.
(f) The term "vessel not under command" means a vessel which
through some exceptional circumstance is unable to
manoeuvre as required by these Rules and is therefore unable
to keep out of the way of another vessel.
(g) The term "vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre"
means a vessel which from the nature of her work is restricted
in her ability to manoeuvre as required by these Rules and is
therefore unable to keep out of the way of another vessel.
(h) The term "vessel constrained by her draught" means a power-
driven vessel which, because of her draught in relation to the
available depth and width of navigable water, is severely
restricted in her ability to deviate from the course she is
following.
(i) The word "underway" means that a vessel is not at anchor, or
made fast to the shore, or aground.
(k) Vessels shall be deemed to be in sight of one another only
when one can be observed visually from the other.
(l) The term "restricted visibility" means any condition in which
visibility is restricted by fog, mist, falling snow, heavy
rainstorms, sandstorms, or other similar causes.
(m) The term "Wing-In-Ground (WIG) craft" means a multimodal
craft which, in its main operational mode, flies in close
proximity to the surface by utilising surface-effect action.

Part B – General
Section I (Conduct of vessel in any condition of visibility)
• Rule 4 – Application
• Rule 5 – Lookout
• Rule 6 – Safe Speed
• Rule 7 – Risk of Collision
• Rule 8 – Action to Avoid Collision
• Rule 9 – Narrow Channels
• Rule 10 – Traffic Separation Schemes

Rule 5 – Lookout
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 of the risk of collision.

Rule 5 – Lookout – Comment
• Who – every vessel
• When – at all times
• What – proper lookout
• How – all available means.
• New equipment ?
• Intention –
1. for a proper appraisal of the situation, and
2. risk of collision

Rule 5 – Lookout – Case Law
• Duty of lookout – Shakkeborg v Wimbledon – Report every material light
(Bargrave Dean J, 191 1)
• Binoculars - Gorm-Santa Alicia (Hewson J, 1961)
• Faulty appreciation of VHF and absence of radar lookout - Bovenkerk-Antonio
Carlos (Brandon J, 1973)
• Readily available radar, failure to use - Vechtstroom-Claughton (Hewson J, 1964)
• Radar not working - Pocahontas Steamship Company-Esso Amba (American
Case, 1950)
• CA comment - Properly working radar, duty to use in RV (Judge Medina, 1959)
• Visual lookout necessary - Anneliese-Arietta (Kaminski LJ, 1970)
• Full appraisal of situation - Staffordshire-Dunera (Willmer J, 1948)
• Anchor watch - Gerda Toft-Elizabeth Mary (Willmer J, 1953)

Rule 5 – Lookout – Recent Collision
31 October 2014 - Early hours - Open Seas - Middle of Ocean
http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Visakhapatnam/navy-ship-suffers-minordamage-in-
collision/article6552939.ece

Rule 6 – Safe Speed (Excerpt)
• Every vessel shall at all times proceed at a safe speed so that she can
take proper and effective action to avoid collision and be stopped
within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and
conditions…..
• Additionally, it states factors to be taken into account by all vessels;
• And, further factors to be taken into account by vessels with
operational radar.

Rule 6 – Safe Speed – Comment
• What – proceed at a safe speed
• How – take all factors into account. Additional for vessels with
operating radar
• Intention –
1. Proper and effective action to avoid collision,
2. Be stopped at an appropriate distance

Rule 6 – Safe Speed – Case Law
• At all times - Kurt Alt-Petrel (Hewson J, 1962)
• Proper and effective action - Ring-Orlik (Sir Jocelyn Simon, President of the
Court, 1964
• Within a distance appropriate - Glorious-Florida (Scrutton LJ, 1933)
• Radar, continuous watch - Norefoss-Fina Canada (Hewson J, 1962)
• Radar, inferences - Niceto de Larrinaga-Sitala (Hewson J, 1963)
• Radar, range scale, LR scanning - Nassau-Brott (Hewson J, 1963)
• Radar, interference – 1979 collision in a squall between Atlantic Empress
and Aegean Captain – inquiry at Greece held both vessels responsible – no
proper use of radar and excessive speed

Rule 7 – Risk of Collision
(a) Every vessel shall use all available means appropriate to the prevailing
circumstances and conditions to determine if risk of collision exists. If there is any
doubt such risk shall be deemed to exist.
(b) Proper use shall be made of radar equipment if fitted and operational, including
long-range scanning to obtain early warning of risk of collision and radar plotting
or equivalent systematic observation of detected objects.
(c) Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information, especially
scanty radar information.
(d) In determining if risk of collision exists the following considerations shall be
among those taken into account:
(i) such risk shall be deemed to exist if the compass bearing of an approaching vessel does not
appreciably change;
(ii) such risk may sometimes exist even when an appreciable bearing change is evident,
particularly when approaching a very large vessel or a tow or when approaching a vessel at
close range.

Rule 7 – Risk of Collision – Comment
• What – determine risk of collision
• How – use all available means
• Talks about use of radar, how to use
• Caution when close to other vessels.
• Cross reference
• Rule 34 – Manoeuvring and warning signals
• Rule 35 – Sound signals in restricted visibility

Rule 7 – Risk of Collision – Case Law
• Banshee-Kildare (Esher L, 1887)
“Now at what period of time is it that the Regulations begin to apply to two ships?
It cannot be said that they are applicable however far off the ships may be.
Nobody could seriously contend that if two ships are six miles apart the
Regulations for Preventing Collisions are applicable to them. They only apply at a
time, when, if either of them does anything contrary to the Regulations, it will
cause danger of collision. None of the Regulations apply unless that period of
time has arrived. It follows that anything done before the time arrives at which
the Regulations apply is immaterial, because anything done before that time
cannot produce risk of collision within the meaning of the Regulations.”
• Navigate by COLREG and not VHF - Angelic Spirit-Y Mariner (Clarke J, 1994)
• Stated that VHF Communication allowed to inform other ship in order to reduce
risk - Mineral Dampier - Hanjin Madras [2001] EWCA Civ 1278 (Phillips LJ)

Rule 8 – Action to Avoid Collision
(a) Any action taken to avoid collision shall be taken in accordance with the Rules of this Part and shall, if the circumstances of the
case admit, be positive, made in ample time and with due regard to the observance of good seamanship.
(b) Any alteration of course and/or speed to avoid collision shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be large enough to be readily
apparent to another vessel observing visually or by radar; a succession of small alterations of course and/or speed should be
avoided.
(c) If there is sufficient sea-room, alteration of course alone may be the most effective action to avoid a close-quarters situation
provided that it is made in good time, is substantial and does not result in another close-quarters situation.
(d) Action taken to avoid collision with another vessel shall be such as to result in passing at a safe distance. The effectiveness of the
action shall be carefully checked until the other vessel is finally past and clear.
(e) If necessary to avoid collision or allow more time to assess the situation, a vessel shall slacken her speed or take all way off by
stopping or reversing her means of propulsion.
(f) (i) A vessel which, by any of these Rules, is required not to impede the passage or safe passage of another vessel shall, when
required by the circumstances of the case, take early action to allow sufficient sea-room for the safe passage of the other vessel.
(ii) A vessel required not to impede the passage or safe passage of another vessel is not relieved of this obligation if approaching
the other vessel so as to involve risk of collision and shall, when taking action, have full regard to the action which may be required
by the Rules of this Part.
(iii) A vessel the passage of which is not to be impeded remains fully obliged to comply with the Rules of this Part when the two
vessels are approaching one another so as to involve risk of collision

Rule 8 – Action to Avoid Collision – Comment
• Action to be with due regard – rules of this section, ample time, positive
• Action to be large enough to be readily apparent – visual or radar
• Action should result in safe passing – observe while in progress
• If necessary, Slow down or stop – use means of propulsion
• Cross reference
• Rule 18 – Responsibilities between vessels

Rule 8 – Action to Avoid Collision – Case Law
• IMO SN Circ. 226 issued in Dec 2002 - Dangers of conflicting action in
collision avoidance
• No excuse not to follow COLREGS - Maloja 11-John M (Sheen J, 1993)
• Substantial, readily apparent - Billings Victory-Warren Chase (Willmer
J, 1949)
• Small alterations – collision - British Aviator-Crystal Jewel 1964

Rule 9 – Narrow Channels
(a) A vessel proceeding along the course of a narrow channel or fairway shall keep as near to the
outer limit of the channel or fairway which lies on her starboard side as is safe and practicable.
(b) A vessel of less than 20 m in length or a sailing vessel shall not impede the passage of a vessel
which can safely navigate only within a narrow channel or fairway.
(c) A vessel engaged in fishing shall not impede the passage of any other vessel navigating within a
narrow channel or fairway.
(d) A vessel shall not cross a narrow channel or fairway if such crossing impedes the passage of a
vessel which can safely navigate only within such channel or fairway. The latter vessel may use
the sound signal prescribed in Rule 34(d) if in doubt as to the intention of the crossing vessel.
(e) (i) In a narrow channel or fairway when overtaking can take place only if the vessel to be
overtaken has to take action to permit safe passing, the vessel intending to overtake shall
indicate her intention by sounding the appropriate signal prescribed in Rule 34(c)(i). The vessel
to be overtaken shall, if in agreement, sound the appropriate signal prescribed in Rule 34(c)(ii)
and take steps to permit safe passing. If in doubt she may sound the signals prescribed in Rule
34(d).

Rule 9 – Narrow Channels (Contd.)
(ii) This Rule does not relieve the overtaking vessel of her obligation under Rule 13.
(f) A vessel nearing a bend or an area of a narrow channel or fairway where other vessels may be
obscured by an intervening obstruction shall navigate with particular alertness and caution and
shall sound the appropriate signal prescribed in Rule 34(e).
(g) Any vessel shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, avoid anchoring in a narrow channel.

Rule 9 – Narrow Channels – Comment
• Who – Ships in narrow channel
• When – Proceeding along the course of narrow channel or fairway
• What – Keep to starboard. Avoid anchoring. Make sound signals as prescribed.
• Miscellaneous – FV not to impede. Vessel not to cross narrow channel impeding
other vessel inside the narrow channel. Overtaking after permission.
• Cross reference
• Rules in Part B Section II (Navigation in sight of one another)

Rule 9 – Narrow Channels – Case Law
• Passage 2 nautical miles wide – held narrow channel – Anna Salen-
Thorshovdi, 1954
• Passage 1.2 nautical miles wide – not held narrow channel - Faith I -
Independence (US Court, 1992)
• Vessels criticized for not using radar - British Tenacity-Minster (Hewson J ,
1953)
• Vessel entering narrow channel – not mentioned in rules - Canberra Star-
City of Lyons (Hewson J, 1962) stated “Vessels already in it, as well as those
about to enter it, should behave reasonably. It does not appear to me that
the vessel in the channel has a complete right of way, and she must not hog
the river regardless of the reasonable aspirations of other vessels.”
• Tides - Burton-Prince Leopold de Belgique (Sir Gore11 Barnes, 1908)
• Bends and tides - Trevethick-Talabot (Butt J, 1890)

Rule 9 – Narrow Channels – The “Willmer test”
• Rule 9 DOES NOT define ‘Narrow Channel’.
• The Jaroslaw Dabrowski [1952] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 20 at page 26, Sir Gordon Willmer
(then Willmer J ) states “
“What Mr. Justice Langton {in The Varmdo [1940] P.15} was in effect saying
in his judgment in that case was that a “narrow channel” within the rule is that
which by the practice of seamen is treated, and necessarily treated, as a narrow
channel...”
• This suggests that the legal test (the “Willmer test”) for determining whether a
channel is a narrow channel where Rule 9 applies is how seamen in fact
navigate in the locality.
• The Anna Salden [1954] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 475, Willmer J. said at page 487 that the
Elder Brethren advised him that it would not be possible to define what was the
channel for the purposes of the narrow channel rule.

Rule 9 applies or not?
Master jailed while the debate continues!
KULEMESIN AND ANOTHER v HKSAR [2013] HKCFA 14

Rule 9 – Narrow Channels – Video
• Yacht v/s supertanker in our backwaters
• http://youtu.be/_tUoUxzt9sI
• News coverage
• http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-24670515
• http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/25/skipper-fined-cowes-
week-collision
• Rules 1, 2, 5, 9

Rule 10 – Traffic Separation Schemes
(a) This Rule applies to traffic separation schemes adopted by the Organization and does not relieve any vessel of her
obligation under any other rule.
(b) (Duties of vessel joining, navigating and leaving a TSS)
(c) (Crossing a TSS)
(d) (Navigation in Inshore Traffic Zone)
(e) (Exception)
(f) (Exercise caution when navigating nearby)
(g) (Attempt to avoid anchoring in a TSS or near its terminations)
(h) (Not using TSS ? Keep well away)
(i) (FV not to impede any vessel in TSS)
(j) (Vessel of L<20m and SV not to impede PD in TSS)
(k) (RAM exempted as necessary for maintenance of safety of navigation)
(l) (RAM excepted for laying under water cables etc in TSS)

Rule 10 – TSS – Comment
• IMO Resolution A.572(14) – General Provisions on Ship Routeing
• Rule 10 mandatory in IMO adopted TSS.
• A government may also recommend the use of traffic separation schemes in international waters
off its coast, without having submitted such schemes to IMO for adoption. (e.g. off coast of
Japan).
• No exemption for FV in TSS.
• Crossing mandatory at a heading right angles to traffic lane.
• Cross reference
• Rule 3 – Definition of TSS
• Rule 8 – Action to avoid collision
• Rules in Part B Section II (Navigation in sight of one another); or Section III (Navigation in restricted visibility)
• Rule 34 – Manoeuvring and warning signals; or Rule 35 – Sound signals in restricted visibility

Rule 10 – TSS – Collision Case Study
USS Porter collided with MOL’s M/T Otowasan
• 12 August 2012 – Collision occurred in straits of Hormuz
• NBC News - http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/12/13242239-us-navy-ship-collides-
with-oil-tanker-in-gulf?lite
• The Guardian - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/aug/12/navy-destroyer-uss-porter-
damaged
• 14 May 2013 - US Destroyer’s bridge audio recording
• http://archive.navytimes.com/article/20130514/NEWS/305140001/Hear-audio-Chaos-bridge-
before-brutal-ship-collision
• http://gcaptain.com/intense-bridge-conversation-porter/
• August 2014 – Volts Shipping Navigation S.A. sues United States of America
• Citing violation of Rules 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 14, 15, and 16, of the International Regulations for
Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (COLREGS) and their “otherwise negligent navigation and
manning of the vessel”
• 08 August 2014 in New York - http://dockets.justia.com/docket/new-
york/nysdce/1:2014cv06333/431052
• 11 August 2014 in Virgina -
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/virginia/vaedce/2:2014cv00401/307898

Rule 10 – TSS – Grounded Ship Video
• What may happen if you move out of the TSS lane
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnUWtIpSMH8

Rule 10 – TSS – Case Law
• 1986 – Sail training vessel De Eendrucht, fitted with auxillary engine but
propelled under sails only, crossed at a different heading to prevent
uncontrolled gybing. OOW prosecuted in Ansterdam for non compliane of
Rule 10 (c) because he failed to use the Auxillary engine to achieve a right-
angled crossing.
• 1973, a collision between the American Aquarius and the Atlantic Hope in a
non-IMO-adopted but nationally declared TSS – held in the United States
Court of Appeals that the TSS had not attained the status of a custom and
that the action of the American Aquarius in proceeding in the wrong
direction in the traffic lane could not be fairly characterised as a failure to
conform with good seamanship.
• Crossing to join - Century Dawn-Asian Energy (Clarke J, 1994) – obligation
under rule 10 (c) paramount even if crossing to join.

Part B - General
Section II (Conduct of vessels in sight of one another)
• Rule 12 – Sailing Vessels
• Rule 13 – Overtaking
• Rule 14 – Head-On Situation
• Rule 15 – Crossing
• Rule 16 – Action by Give Way Vessel
• Rule 17 – Action by Stand On Vessel
• Rule 18 – Responsibilities

Rule 11 – Application
Rules in this section apply to vessels in sight of one another.
Comment
• Rule 3(k) states that vessels shall be deemed to be in sight of on
another only when one can be observed visually from the other in
this section apply to vessels in sight of one another.
• Not applicable when other vessel is detected by radar and risk of
collision also exists.

Rule 12 – Sailing Vessels
a) When two sailing vessels are approaching one another, so as to involve
risk of collision, one of them shall keep out of the way of the other as
follows:
i. when each has the wind on a different side, the vessel which has the wind on the
port side shall keep out of the way of the other;
ii. when both have the wind on the same side, the vessel which is to windward shall
keep out of the way of the vessel which is to leeward;
iii. if a vessel with the wind on the port side sees a vessel to windward and cannot
determine with certainty whether the other vessel has the wind on the port or on
the starboard side, she shall keep out of the way of the other.
b) For the purpose of this Rule the windward side shall be deemed to be
the side opposite to that on which the mainsail is carried or, in the case
of a square-rigged vessel, the side opposite to that on which the largest
fore-and-aft sail is carried.

Rule 12 – Sailing Vessels – Comment
• Who – Sailing Vessels, in sight of one another
• When – the risk of collision is present
• What – vessel with wind on port side or the windward vessel has to keep out of
the way of the other.
• Exception – Does not apply when SV overtaking another SV (Rule 13 applied)
• Cross reference
• Rule 7 – Risk of collision
• Rule 13 – Overtaking

Rule 13 – Overtaking
a) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rules of part B, sections I and II, any
vessel overtaking any other shall keep out of the way of the vessel being
overtaken.
b) A vessel shall be deemed to be overtaking when coming up with another vessel
from a direction more than 22.58 abaft her beam, that is, in such a position
with reference to the vessel she is overtaking, that at night she would be able
to see only the sternlight of that vessel but neither of her sidelights.
c) When a vessel is in any doubt as to whether she is overtaking another, she shall
assume that this is the case and act accordingly.
d) Any subsequent alteration of the bearing between the two vessels shall not
make the overtaking vessel a crossing vessel within the meaning of these Rules
or relieve her of the duty of keeping clear of the overtaken vessel until she is
finally past and clear.

Rule 13 – Overtaking – Comment
• Supersedes all rules of Part B Section I & II
• Who – Any vessel overtaking another
• When – overtaking (technically defined within rule)
• What – overtaking vessel “keep out of the way” of the overtaken vessel
• How – not explicitly mentioned. Pass at safe distance. Interaction between vessels to be accounted for.
• Based on the principle of allocating prime responsibility to the vessel which will usually be more capable of
keeping out of the way. If no such distinction were made the vessel with the greater ability to take effective
avoiding action would be more likely to wait for the other to keep out of the way.
• Cross reference
• Rule 17 – Action by stand-on vessel

Rule 13 – Overtaking – Collision in Suez Canal
• 29 September 2014 – Suez Canal
• Southbound, off Port Said
• Colombo Express collided with Maersk Tanjong
• Video of collision – See at 2:22 after start
• http://youtu.be/2ktwo-k-onk
• AIS recording of collision
• http://youtu.be/HMV7W0QClkA

Rule 13 – Overtaking – Collision in Singapore
Straits
• Video of collision
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmDybTIxrJc

Rule 13 – Overtaking – Case Law
• Overtaking vessel duty bound to keep clear - Baines Hawkins-
Moliere (Sir F Jeune, 1893)
• Diverging vessel, coming from behind – altered to converge and
collided – held at fault – Auriga-Manuel Campos (Brandon J, 1976)
• Overtaking Rule applies as per ‘relative geometry of vessels’ before
risk of collision is apparent - Olympian-Nowy Sacz (Court of Appeal,
1977, Sir David Cairns)
• Overtaking (narrow channels or rivers) Ore Chief-Olympic Torch
(Brandon J., 1974)

Rule 14 – Head-on Situation
a) When two power-driven vessels are meeting on reciprocal or nearly
reciprocal courses so as to involve risk of collision each shall alter
her course to starboard so that each shall pass on the port side of
the other.
b) Such a situation shall be deemed to exist when a vessel sees the
other ahead or nearly ahead and by night she could see the
masthead lights of the other in a line or nearly in a line and/or both
sidelights and by day she observes the corresponding aspect of the
other vessel.
c) When a vessel is in any doubt as to whether such a situation exists
she shall assume that it does exist and act accordingly.

Rule 14 – Head-on Situation – Comment
• Who – Two power driven vessels
• When – on reciprocal or nearly reciprocal courses i.e. within 6 degrees of
reciprocal (see technical specification of side lights)
• What – each to alter to starboard
• No vessel privileged.
• Cross reference
• Rule 16 – Action by give way vessel

Rule 14 – Head-on Situation – Collision in Kiel
Canal
• Video of collision
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52z0H1HlHDA
• Video of damage
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bkSa6qRLU0

Rule 15 – Crossing Situation
When two power-driven vessels are crossing so as to involve risk of
collision, the vessel which has the other on her own starboard side
shall keep out of the way and shall, if the circumstances of the case
admit, avoid crossing ahead of the other vessel.

Rule 15 – Crossing Situation – Comment
• Who – Two power driven vessels
• When – crossing
• What – shall keep out of the way
• How – not mentioned but the rule states “shall, if the circumstances of the case admit,
avoid crossing ahead of the other vessel.”
• Does not apply when one vessel is hampered. Rule 18 applies then.
• Cross reference
• Rule 16 – Action by give way vessel
• Rule 34 – Maneuvering and warning signals

Rule 15 – Crossing Situation – Case Law
• Avoid crossing ahead - King Stephen-Ashton (Sir Gorell Barnes, 1905)
• Vesse stopped but unerway – must comply – Lucania-Broomjield,
1905
• Applies in coastal waters too. But, Alcoa Rambler-Norefjord, 1949,
held rule not applicable as stand-on vessel was constantly changing
course.
• Narrow Channel – 2009 Collision – HKG CFA case – mentioned earlier
• Crossing rule separate from Narrow Channel rule - Empire Brent-
Stormont (Willmer J, 1948)

Rule 15 – Crossing Situation – Case Study
• Samco Europe v MSC Prestige [2011] EWHC 1580 (Admlty).
• Kofopoulos, Konstantinos (2011) Admiralty law - Samco Europe v MSC
Prestige [2011] EWHC 1580 (Admlty). Shipping and Trade Law, 11, (6), 6-8.
• P&I Newsletter – Admiralty Court case summary
• http://www.britanniapandi.com/en/news_and_publications/risk-
watch/risk-watch-archive/risk-watch-2012/vol-19-no-1-feb-
2012/index.cfm#a
• Samco Europe – Flag state investigation report
• http://www.beamer-france.org/BanqueDocument/pdf_172.pdf
• Samco Europe – Damage Photographs
• http://www.aukevisser.nl/supertankers/part-4/id668.htm

Rule 16 – Action by give-way vessel
Every vessel which is directed to keep out of the way of another vessel
shall, so far as possible, take early and substantial action to keep well
clear.

Rule 16 – Action by give-way vessel –
Comment
• Who – Give way vessel
• When – complying with the rules
• What – take early and substantial action
• How – not mentioned specifically in this rule but relates to Rule 15 or Rule 18.
• Cross reference
• Rule 9 – Narrow Channel
• Rule 10 – Traffic Separation Schemes
• Rule 15 – Crossing Situation

Rule 17 – Action by stand-on vessel
a) (i) Where one of two vessels is to keep out of the way the other shall keep her
course and speed.
(ii) The latter vessel may, however, take action to avoid collision by her manoeuvre
alone, as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of
the way is not taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules.
(b) When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself
so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone,
she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision.
(c) A power-driven vessel which takes action in a crossing situation in accordance with
subparagraph (a)(ii) of this Rule to avoid collision with another power-driven vessel
shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, not alter course to port for a vessel on
her own port side.
(d) This Rule does not relieve the give-way vessel of her obligation to keep out of the way.

Rule 17 – Action by stand-on vessel–
Comment
All other than paragraph (a) are new and constitute one of the most fundamental changes in 1972
Regulations. The Rule does not apply when vessels are not in sight of one another or when no risk of
collision is present.
• Who – Stand-on vessel
• When – when other vessel not taking appropriate action or too close to collision
• What – action to avoid collision
• How – not mentioned specifically in this rule but prohibits alteration to port for power driven vessel.
• Cross reference
• Rule 2 – Responsibility
• Rule 15 – Crossing Situation

Rule 17 – Action by stand-on vessel –
Case Law
• Allowed stand-on vessel to stop to pick up pilot – Windsor-Roanoke,
1908 (Lord Alberstone)
• Vessel adjusting compasses - Manchester Regiment-Clan Mackenzie,
1938 (President, Lord Merriman) – held to have been give way vessel
• Fine crossing - Lok Vivek-Common Venture (Clarke J, 1995) – action
too late by Lok Vivek
• Overtaking from behind - Koscierzyna-Hanjin Singapore, Court of
Appeal (1995) – The stand-on vessel should have taken action

Rule 18 – Responsibilities between vessels
Except where Rules 9, 10 and 13 otherwise require:
(a) (PD underway to keep out of NUC, RAM, FV, SV)
(b) (SV underway to keep out of NUC, RAM, FV)
(c) (FV underway to keep out of NUC, RAM)
(d) (Vessel other than NUC, RAM not to impede CBD, who must
navigate carefully)
(e) (Seaplane to keep clear of all. Comply with COLREG if necessary)
(f) (WIG when landing / taking off, keep clear of all. WIG navigating,
comply with COLREG)

Rule 18 – Responsibilities between vessels –
Comment
• Rules 9 (Narrow Channel), 10 (TSS) and 13 (Overtaking) take precedence
over this rule.
• Straight forward rule.
• Categories of vessels defined in per Rule 3
• Based on the principle of allocating prime responsibility to the vessel
which will usually be more capable of keeping out of the way.
• If no such distinction were made the vessel with the greater ability to take
effective avoiding action would be more likely to wait for the other to keep out of
the way.
• Two hampered vessels of save category – each to take whatever action
necessary
• Hovercrafts, hydrofoils – power driven vessels within the meaning of rule

Part B - General
Section III (Conduct of vessels in restricted visibility)
• Rule 19 – Conduct of vessels in restricted visibility

Rule 19 – Conduct of vessels in restricted
visibility
(a) This Rule applies to vessels not in sight of one another when navigating in or near an area of restricted
visibility.
(b) Every vessel shall proceed at a safe speed adapted to the prevailing circumstances and conditions of
restricted visibility. A power-driven vessel shall have her engines ready for immediate manoeuvre.
(c) Every vessel shall have due regard to the prevailing circumstances and conditions of restricted visibility
when complying with the Rules of section I of this part.
(d) A vessel which detects by radar alone the presence of another vessel shall determine if a close-quarters
situation is developing and/or risk of collision exists. If so, she shall take avoiding action in ample time,
provided that when such action consists of an alteration of course, so far as possible the following shall be
avoided:
(i) an alteration of course to port for a vessel forward of the beam, other than for a vessel being overtaken;
(ii) an alteration of course towards a vessel abeam or abaft the beam.
(e) Except where it has been determined that a risk of collision does not exist, every vessel which hears
apparently forward of her beam the fog signal of another vessel, or which cannot avoid a close-quarters
situation with another vessel forward of her beam, shall reduce her speed to the minimum at which she can
be kept on her course. She shall if necessary take all her way off and in any event navigate with extreme
caution until danger of collision is over.

visibility – Comment
• Who – vessels
• When – not in sight; in / near area of restricted visibility
• What – proceed at safe speed, keep engine ready.
• How – lookout!
• Presence by Radar alone? Determine risk of collision or close quarter situation; take avoiding action in ample
time. Certain actions prohibited.
• Fog signal ahead or cannot avoid close quarter situation with vessel ahead, slow down or take all way off.
• Cross reference
• Rule 3 – Definitions
• Rule 9 – Narrow channels
• Rule 10 – Traffic separation schemes

visibility – Case Law
• Good seamanship precautions must be taken when you see fog ahead - Gladiator-St Paul (Sir Gore11
Barnes, 1909)
• Safe speed / reduction mandated – 1961 collision occurred in dense fog between the Freshfield, at anchor,
and the Lady Gwendolen, proceeding upriver in River Mersey. Master COC supsended in Formal
Investigation in 1962. Owner’s LL not allowed in Admiraly Court (Hewson J, 1964), same upheld in Court of
Appeal (Sellers LJ, Wilmer LJ)
• Distance for close quarter situation, Grepa-Verena (Wilmer LJ, 1961) stated “..must depend upon the size,
characteristics and speed of the ships concerned…. a distance measurable in miles rather than in yards”
• Fog signals abaft – vessel should have stopped engines – Bremen-British Grenadier, 1931
• Fog signal reported – Chusan-Protector (Willmer J, 1955)
• Navigate with caution – no radar – vessel should stop and be certain - Union-Vulcano (Bateson J, 1928)
• A/C, fog signal, situation undetermined – many cases Oakmore-Aras (Sir Gorell Barnes, 1906), Wear-Havbris
(Hill J, 1925) Thorshovdi-Anna Salen (Wilmer J, 1954) Miguel de Larrinaga-Hjelmaren (Wilmer J, 1956),
Achille Lauro-Cornelis B., (Wilmer J, 1956), Linde-Aristos (Brandon J, 1969)….
• Take all way off - Monarch-Jaunty (Wilmer J, 1953)

visibility – Case Study
• 08 April 2005 – Lykes Voyager collided with Washington Senator off
Hong Kong in dense fog
• MAIB report
• http://www.maib.gov.uk/publications/investigation_reports/2006/lykes_voya
ger_washington_senator.cfm
• Look out, safe speed, navigation in RV, VHF communication, mistaken
identity.

Part C – Lights and Shapes
(Contains details about lights and shapes, and what lights and shapes
to be displayed depending upon type of vessel)
• Rule 22 – Visibility of Lights
• Rule 23 – Power driven vessels underway
• Rule 24 – Towing and pushing
• Rule 25 – Sailing vessel underway and vessel under oars

Part C – Lights and Shapes (Contd.)
• Rule 26 – Fishing vessels
• Rule 27 - Vessels not under command or restricted in their ability to
manoeuvre
• Rule 28 – Vessels constrained by their draught
• Rule 29 – Pilot vessels
• Rule 30 – Anchored vessels and vessels aground
• Rule 31 – Seaplanes
• Also includes reference to WIG

Part D – Sound and Light Signals
• Rule 33 – Equipment for sound signals
• Rule 36 – Signals to attract attention
• Rule 37 – Distress signals
• Directs to Annex IV of the Regulations

Part E - Exemptions
• Rule 38 – Exemptions
• 4 years exemption permitted from the date of entry into force of these
Regulations for certain matters
• 9 years exemption permitted from the date of entry into force of these
Regulations for certain matters
• One particular issue allowed permanent exemption
• Ships with such exemptions rare today due to age and regulatory compliance
issues with other matters. e.g. SOLAS and MARPOL requirements.

Annexes
• ANNEX I – Positioning and technical details of lights and shapes
• ANNEX II – Additional signals for fishing vessels fishing in close
proximity
• ANNEX III – Technical details of sound signal appliances
• ANNEX IV – Distress signals
• Latest amendment in this part.

Amendment to Regulations
Amendments
• Maritime Safety Committee in IMO
• Passed as IMO Assembly Resolutions
Latest Amendment
• IMO Resolution A. 1004 (25)
• Adopted on 29 November 2007
• Entry into force on 1 December 2009

“The regulations are made for seamen to
follow and should be interpreted by the
Courts in the same way as seamen would
interpret them.”

Caveat consules!
• The Koningin Juliana [1974] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 353
• Cairns LJ states “The regulations are made for seamen to follow and should be
interpreted by the Courts in the same way as seamen would interpret them.”
• The Crackshot, (1949) 82 Ll.L.Rep. 594
• Willmer J states “The second consideration which has much impressed me is the fact
that these by-laws are, after all, made for seamen to read, and they are, in my
judgment, to be construed as a seaman would construe them. In those
circumstances, I thought it was proper to ask the Elder Brethren how they, as
seamen, would understand the words used in the by-law. They have answered me
without any hesitation that in their minds what the by-law means is that each vessel
must keep to the starboard side of the dredged, or maintained, channel. That is how
they, as seamen, would understand that direction.”

Further Information
• International Maritime Organization
• www.IMO.org > About IMO > List of Conventions > COLREG
• IMO Publication - E904E COLREG (ISBN 92-801-4167-8)
• The Merchant Shipping (Distress Signals and Prevention of Collisions)
Regulations 1996
• MSN 1781 (M + F) issued by MCA UK
• Other MSNs, MGNs, MINs by MCA UK
• Cockroft AN and Lameijer JNF, A Guide to the Collision Avoidance Rules
• For US Waters
• USCG Navigation Center ( http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/ > Nav Rules )
• COLREG Demarcation Lines - Title 33 Code of Federal Regulations part 80

COLREG 1972, A Presentation

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to COLREG 1972, A Presentation

Similar to COLREG 1972, A Presentation (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

COLREG 1972, A Presentation