Seaway failed to provide instrumental recordings of its positions & M Pigneguy relied on his own reckoning notwithstanding Seaway no doubt, had state of the art navigational equipment, with AIS course information being available up till 3 months later.”
Judge Wylie once again rubbished this 5th Submission made by Bolton saying “there’s no evidential support for that proposition & in my opinion it is irrelevant. What is in issue is which vessel was obliged to give way to the other pursuant to the Maritime Rules & whether it did so in accordance with those Rules”
Judge Wylie had been provided with this additional evidence
(a) The only electronic GPS/Radar position said to have been made at the time “20 deg x .25 nmile off Browns Light” is in doubt as the ferry had not stopped but went past so fast with M Pigneguy’s arm outside the wheelhouse window, as he was fumbling the aerosol horn to make further sounds as his safe passing was acknowledged by Classique. Phillip Sweetman admitted in evidence he had not seen M Pigneguy take any GPS or Radar readings but he copied the information given to him by M Pigneguy at the end of the day back in Auckland in preparation for a claim to MNZ.
(b) Having AIS records would’ve backed up M Pigneguy’s stated course but he avoids answering as to whether he had AIS onboard – the monitor was visible in a photograph taken by MNZ – he just questions what use it would be. If it wasn’t working then, it was repaired or there was a new installation which was automatically sending course information a few months later providing the records Bolton obtained subsequently showing the Regular Routes Seaway followed to Auckland rounding Browns Island.
(c) M Pigneguy said he was on a course of 286*True but there’s no verification provided. Phillip Sweetman at the hearing admitted he had not checked the course of Seaway. Bolton has followed that course on the water & plotted it on the chart – it heads to the white cliff ahead of Classique in Photo 1 at which point Seaway had already turned starboard/North to a point above the Sentinal Building. Photos 2 & 3 show further incremental turning starboard.
For Judge Wylie to say there’s no evidential support & that Bolton’s submission is irrelevant, indicates a deviation from what one might believe is normal Court practice for claimants to verify the statements & evidence they give. No positions given by M Pigneguy are verified & if he wasn’t able to prove where he said he was, the Court hasn’t a foundation to begin to determine “which vessel was obliged to give way to the other pursuant to the Maritime Rules & whether it did so in accordance with those Rules” Bolton’s evidence has been disregarded by both Judges Wylie & Davis in preference for the fiction provided by the prosecution.
This chart provided by M Pigneguy is showing only a course he intended taking –
it bears distant resemblance to the course Seaway followed on the day.
The point of incident has been proved inaccurate as well as the course to get there.
The turning point at Sth Motuihe might be the least far out.