{"id":13590,"date":"2017-04-07T10:47:48","date_gmt":"2017-04-07T10:47:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/192.168.1.14\/index.php\/2017\/04\/07\/narrow-channel-and-crossing-rule\/"},"modified":"2025-09-01T01:20:03","modified_gmt":"2025-08-31T17:20:03","slug":"narrow-channel-and-crossing-rule","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/zh\/narrow-channel-and-crossing-rule\/","title":{"rendered":"Narrow Channel and Crossing Rule"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><span style=\"text-align: justify;\">&nbsp;<\/span><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-9071\" style=\"padding: 0px; outline: 0px; text-align: justify;\" src=\"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/06\/pdf.png\" alt=\"pdf\" width=\"16\" height=\"16\" \/><span style=\"text-align: justify;\">&nbsp;<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/04\/ALCO20170005-Narrow-Channel-and-Crossing-Rule.pdf\"><span style=\"text-align: justify;\">ENG<\/span><\/a>&nbsp; &nbsp;<img decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-full wp-image-9071\" style=\"padding: 0px; outline: 0px; text-align: justify;\" src=\"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/06\/pdf.png\" alt=\"pdf\" width=\"16\" height=\"16\" \/><span style=\"text-align: justify;\">&nbsp;<\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/04\/ALCO20170005-Narrow-Channel-and-Crossing-Rule_CN.pdf\"><span style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u4e2d\u6587<\/span><\/a><span style=\"text-align: justify;\">&nbsp;&nbsp;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In a recent case Nautical Challenge Ltd v Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd (The \u201cAlexandra 1\u201d and The \u201cEver Smart\u201d) &#8211; QBD (Admlty Ct) (Teare J, sitting with Nautical Assessors) [2017] EWHC 453 (Admlty) &#8211; 13 March 2017, it was decided that crossing rule did not apply in the present case where one vessel is entering the narrow channel, and another vessel is coming out of the narrow channel.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court commented that in the interests of safety, which was the foundation of the Collision Regulations, the crossing rules could not have been intended to apply where one vessel was navigating along a narrow channel, and another vessel was navigating towards that channel with a view to entering it.<\/p>\n<p>See attached file: ALCO20170005 Narrow Channel and Crossing Rule.pdf<\/p>\n<p style=\"border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 12px; text-align: justify;\">&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p style=\"border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 12px; text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 14pt; color: #022469;\"><strong>\u72ed\u6c34\u9053\u53ca\u4ea4\u53c9\u76f8\u9047\u5c40\u9762\u89c4\u5219<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"font-size: 12px; text-align: justify;\">\u8fd1\u671f\uff0cNautical Challenge Ltd v Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd (The \u201cAlexandra 1\u201d and The \u201cEver Smart\u201d) &#8211; QBD (Admlty Ct) (Teare J, sitting with Nautical Assessors) [2017] EWHC 453 (Admlty) &#8211; 13 March 2017\u4e00\u6848\u5224\u51b3\uff0c\u201c\u4ea4\u53c9\u76f8\u9047\u5c40\u9762\u201d\u89c4\u5219\u4e0d\u9002\u7528\u4e8e\u672c\u6848\uff0c\u5373\uff0c\u4e00\u8258\u8239\u6b63\u9a76\u5165\u72ed\u6c34\u9053\uff0c\u800c\u53e6\u4e00\u8258\u8239\u6b63\u9a76\u79bb\u72ed\u6c34\u9053\u7684\u60c5\u51b5\u3002<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-size: 12px; text-align: justify;\">\u6cd5\u5ead\u8ba4\u4e3a\uff0c\u5b89\u5168\u662f\u907f\u78b0\u89c4\u5219\u7684\u57fa\u7840\uff0c\u201c\u4ea4\u53c9\u76f8\u9047\u5c40\u9762\u201d\u89c4\u5219\u7684\u672c\u610f\u4e0d\u53ef\u80fd\u9002\u7528\u4e8e\u4e00\u8258\u8239\u6b63\u6cbf\u72ed\u6c34\u9053\u822a\u884c\uff0c\u800c\u53e6\u4e00\u8258\u8239\u6b63\u60f3\u8981\u9a76\u5165\u8be5\u822a\u9053\u7684\u60c5\u51b5\u3002<\/p>\n<p style=\"border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 12px; text-align: justify;\">\u8be6\u7ec6\u4fe1\u606f\u8bf7\u53c2\u9605\u9644\u4ef6\u3002<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"text-align: justify;\"><br \/><\/span><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;ENG&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;CHN&nbsp;&nbsp; In a recent case Nautical Challenge Ltd v Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd (The \u201cAlexandra 1\u201d and The \u201cEver Smart\u201d) &#8211; QBD (Admlty Ct) (Teare J, sitting with Nautical Assessors) [2017] EWHC 453 (Admlty) &#8211; 13 March 2017, it was decided that crossing rule did not apply in the present case where one vessel [&hellip;]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":9071,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[34],"tags":[125],"class_list":["post-13590","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-circulars","tag-english"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13590","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13590"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13590\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":18428,"href":"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13590\/revisions\/18428"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9071"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13590"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13590"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/andrewliu.com.hk\/zh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13590"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}