A force majeure clause in very simple terms is usually if you have a contract a party can agree on what's going to be a force majeure and whether a party will be excused from performing if a force majeure occurs.
For example, I have to deliver cars and there's a tornado or an avalanche and the trains are stopped because the track is wiped out and the railway can't fulfill their obligation. The parties can agree in the contract that if there's a force majeure like that the railway is relieved of its obligation to perform.
Whether or not the concept of force majeure is captured by the existing legislation, the answer is yes, it is captured. Proposed paragraph (a) of proposed subsection 169.31(1) captures the notion of force majeure.
When we allow an arbitrator to establish the operational terms of the railway with respect to loading, unloading, and delivery of traffic it includes what they have to do and also includes under what conditions they are not obligated to do what the arbitrator will decide is going to be their obligation.
So it not only includes force majeure but it includes other issues that could be put on the table with the railway or the shippers. For example, a problem with the congestion at the port terminal that could affect both the railways and the shippers. Technically speaking that is not force majeure but that's something the arbitrator could look at and impose a term on under proposed paragraph (a) of proposed subsection 169.31(1).