A siding agreement is an agreement between an owner and a railway company that adds specific exclusions to liability insurance coverage. The “siding” refers to a line of railway tracks that runs through the landowner`s land. Liability insurance protects a company`s assets, such as . B a railway company, paying insurance claims and legal fees. The provisions of a siding contract limit the liability of the railway company. The ancillary contract is a kind of insured contract. Other types of insured contracts include leases, elevator maintenance contracts, obligations to indemnify a municipality, and the assumption of unauthorized liability for another party in an agreement or contract for the payment of claims to a third party. The parties to an insured contract undertake to assume certain responsibilities, even if protection against these liabilities is included in the “hold unharmed” provision of a commercial contract. An insured contract renders such a provision invalid. Under a siding agreement, an owner agrees not to sue the railway company for accidents, bodily injury or property damage related to the siding.
The side track, also known as a branch line, which is placed on private property, could be an access road or transfer used by the railway company. A private landowner may receive financial compensation in exchange for the use of his land. Local governments enter into siding agreements to provide towns and villages with the necessary rail services. Governments and railways use ancillary decisions to record asset ownership, financial aspects of the agreement, maintenance and other property management responsibilities. A siding contract is an agreement between a railway company and a landowner whose land is used as part of the company`s railway line. This agreement minimizes some of the railway company`s liability. In particular, the siding agreement is a contractual clause that protects the company from any liability for a loss that may occur on the property on which the track is located. For example, the company enjoys legal immunity in the event of property damage.
Finally, CSX cited paragraph 7.4 of the Sidetrack Agreement, stating that “given the standard of care contained in the agreement between the parties, the government should pay this claim to CSX.” Id. at p. 19. The terms of the Agreement include the rights and obligations of each party, including financial liabilities, ownership of branch line equipment, and procedures for termination of the Agreement. The agreement could stipulate that the landowner agrees not to obstruct or alter the siding or restrict the railway company`s access. The contracting parties undertake to assume full responsibility if the breach of contract results in a claim. For example, the owner assumes full responsibility if failure to keep the side free of debris results in an accident and injury. Everyone accepts joint responsibility if the situation warrants it. The contractual liability regime contained in civil liability insurance protects the insured against certain liabilities agreed in a contract with indemnification provisions. For example, a landscaping company hired by the owner of the property signs a contract in which it agrees to “compensate” the landowner and the railway company for injuries that occur on the siding construction site.
However, the landscaping company`s insurance policy contains contractual liability provisions that exclude these liabilities for the insured and effectively void the “harmless” agreement. The policy restores the liability of the owner and the railway company, as would be the case if there were no contract with the landscaping company. A side agreement invalidates the contractual liability provision and reinforces the “keep harmless” provision. Siding agreements are established when the planning of a railway system involves private property. Railway company officials will contact the landowner and ask for permission to build a siding on their property in exchange for financial compensation. CSX points out that its administrative claim not only asserts unlawful grounds for action, but that it “expressly identifies the relevant contract between the parties” and includes the ancillary agreement as an issue. CSX filed an amended lawsuit in that court on January 5, 2015, alleging a violation of the Sidetrack Agreement and seeking damages of $267,238.14 plus interest. The fee shall not apply if certain conditions of a parallel agreement concluded so provide. Gail Sessoms, grant author and non-profit consultant, writes on nonprofit, small business and personal finance issues.
She volunteers as a court-appointed child advocate, has a background in social services, and writes on issues important to families. Sessoms holds a Bachelor of Arts in Liberal Studies. CSX also attached a copy of the diversion agreement to the claim. .