After a collision near a mark, S protested P, citing rule 18 on her protest form as required by rule 61.2(d). The protest committee declared the protest invalid and refused to proceed with the hearing, because it said the protest should have cited rule 10 rather than rule 18. Had the hearing gone ahead and the parties been questioned, the protest committee said, the protest might have been upheld. S appealed.

 Decision

Rule 61.2(d) requires the protest to identify any rule the protestor believes was broken. If this requirement is not met in the written protest delivered to the race office, it may be met before or during the hearing. There is no requirement that the rule or rules identified must be the rule or rules that are later determined to have been broken, and it is irrelevant for deciding on the validity of the protest that the protestor cited a rule that will very likely not be the applicable rule.

 It is the protest committee, after finding the facts, that determines the applicable rule. Rule 64.2 states that a disqualification or other penalty shall be imposed whether or not the applicable rule was mentioned in the protest
 
 The appeal is upheld to the extent that the protest committee is instructed to hold a new hearing.

ITA 1967/4