Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
ENGLISH SHIPPING LAW
Stephen Girvin *
CASES
126. Barnes v The Charterers of the Motor Vessel Snow Bunting (The Snow Bunting) 1
Collision—“narrow channel” rule—Thames Navigation Licensing and General Byelaws 1993, Byelaw 31(a)—Collision Regulations 1972, r.1(b)
B, an experienced rower, was completing a training session on the River Thames and returning downriver to the Reading University Boat Club. The weather conditions were fine and visibility was clear. Having passed under Caversham Bridge, B intended to turn across the river in order to reach the rowing club’s landing stage. She stopped near the southern bank, looked over her right shoulder and observed that the upstream channel was clear. She then turned partly to port, which was when she saw the Snow Bunting, a 49-ft narrowboat canal and river cruiser, then about eight metres away. B heard the narrowboat sound its horn as the scull was struck amidships on the starboard side by the Snow Bunting’s bow, which rode over the scull. B argued that, since she had not seen the Snow Bunting when she looked over her right shoulder, it must have been travelling on the wrong side of the river. The evidence of the Snow Bunting was that it was keeping to the right and had altered to starboard before the collision.
Decision: Claim allowed.
Held: (1) The International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972, to which effect was given by the Merchant Shipping (Distress Signals and Prevention of Collisions) Regulations 1996,2 provided by r.1(b) that local rules should conform as nearly as possible with the International Regulations. (2) The International Regulations were likely to be applied by a court as representing a safe and sensible system for general application. (3) The Thames Navigation Licensing and General Byelaws 1993 were the applicable local rules, but the byelaws, in relation to how vessels were to be navigated in narrow channels,3 derived from the previous version of the International Regulations, which only required vessels to keep to the starboard side of the centre line of the channel, and not the latest version of those Regulations, which required vessels to keep as far to the starboard side of a narrow channel as was practicable. (4) The byelaw should be construed so as to be consistent with the latest version of the International Regulations. (5) On the evidence,
* Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore.
1. [2012] EWHC B22 (Admlty); [2012] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 647 (Jervis Kay QC).
2. SI 1996/75.
3. Rule 9 of the Regulations. See, generally, S Gault (ed.), Marsden on Collisions at Sea, 13th edn (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 2003), [6.226].
INTERNATIONAL MARITIME AND COMMERCIAL LAW YEARBOOK
114