Update: Safe and Accountable Rail Act Receives Royal Assent
Update: Safe and Accountable Rail Act Receives Royal Assent
On June 18, 2015, the Governor General of Canada gave Royal Assent to Bill C-52, the Safe and Accountable Rail Act. As a previous bulletin described in greater detail, Bill C-52 responds to a number of concerns that gained wide attention following the tragic derailment at Lac-Mégantic, Québec as well as railway company efforts to pass risks of liability onto shippers.
Specifically, Bill C-52 imposes a levy on shipments of crude oil and requires railway companies subject to the authority of Parliament to hold minimum liability insurance set at various thresholds for prescribed third party and contamination risks. Transport Canada’s June 18, 2015 news release in respect of Bill C-52 receiving Royal Assent indicates that “The new liability and compensation regime under the Canada Transportation Act will be brought into force one year from today”.
The legislative process in respect of Bill C-52 resulted in relatively minor revisions, which were primarily to clarify that a railway company is not required to collect, administer and submit the crude oil levy to the Receiver General when it carries traffic at an interswitching rate; instead Bill C-52 imposes those obligations on the first railway company to carry the traffic after loading at a rate other than an interswitching rate.
As explained previously, Bill C-52 restricts a railway company’s ability to unilaterally shift to shippers the risk of third party liability. Recall that certain railway companies have unilaterally issued tariffs that purport to require shippers to indemnify and defend railways from third party spill and accident claims in connection with the transportation of certain dangerous goods. Bill C-52 attempts to address this issue by amending section 137 of the Canada Transportation Act to set out that a railway company’s “liability, including to a third party” shall be dealt with “only by means of a written agreement”. The amendments in respect of Bill C-52 are now effective. As a result, a shipper may now be able to limit its risk exposure by choosing to ship its traffic by way of tariff (as opposed to contract), although it may have to balance its desire for limiting risks it cannot control while its traffic is in transit on the railway with higher rates or inadequate terms of service or both.
by Ryan Gallagher
A Cautionary Note
The foregoing provides only an overview and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are cautioned against making any decisions based on this material alone. Rather, specific legal advice should be obtained.
© McMillan LLP 2015
Insights (5 Posts)View More
Ontario (Might get the) Right to Repair – An overview of Bill 187 the Right to Repair Consumer Electronic Products, Household Appliances, Wheelchairs, Motor Vehicles and Farming Heavy Equipment Act, 2024
Ontario considers new right to repair legislation for consumer products and motor vehicles.
More Than Meets the Eye: The Legal Implications of British Columbia’s Agreement to Recognize Aboriginal Title Over Haida Gwaii
An analysis of legal implications related to the BC Government's agreement with the Haida Nation to recognize Aboriginal title over Haida Gwaii.
Lessons Learned from the TTC’s Ransomware Attack
Lessons learned from the recent investigation by the Ontario IPC into the effectiveness of the TTC's cybersecurity measures and ransomware attack response
Don’t Get Caught by Canada’s Patent Novelty Grace-Period
The key difference between Canada and other jurisdictions like the United States when relying on the grace-period for inventor disclosures.
Shifting Gears – Canada to Consider New Motor Vehicle Equipment Regulations to Help Prevent Auto Theft
Transport Canada announces plan to update safety standards to combat auto theft.
Get updates delivered right to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time.