THE "HURUNUI."

(1939) 64 Ll L Rep 305

COURT OF APPEAL.

Before Lord Justice Scott, Lord Justice Finlay and Lord Justice du Parcq, sitting with Rear-Admiral K. D. W. Macpherson and Captain W. E. Whittingham, Nautical Assessors.

Collision - Crossing courses - Duty of stand-on vessel where no action taken by giving-way vessel-Collision Regulations, Art. 21: "Where by any of these Rules one of two vessels is to keep out of the way, the other shall keep her course and speed. Note.-When, in consequence of thick weather or other causes, such vessel finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the giving-way vessel alone, she also shall take such action as will best aid to avert collision"-Collision between steam drifter Reclaim and steamship Hurunui off Lowestoft in broad daylight-Vessels on crossing courses, the Reclaim being the giving-way vessel-One short blast sounded and starboard helm action taken by Hurunui to give Reclaim more sea-room - Engines of Hurunui put astern when it became apparent that Reclaim was taking no action to avoid collision - Collision between stem of Hurunui and starboard side of Reclaim, Reclaim being sunk, with loss of nine of her crew of ten-Duty of Hurunui under Art. 21n - Whether she took "such action as will best aid to avert collision"-Suggestion that Hurunui should have reversed instead of or concurrently with her starboard helm action - Ability of drifters to alter course very quickly and in very small water space - Reclaim admittedly to blame - Appeal by Hurunui against decision of Sir Boyd Merriman, P., that she also was to blame for her failure to comply with the Note to Art. 21, in that she ought to have reversed earlier than she did.