A toll agreement provides a period of negotiation for the parties before an applicant is required to file an action to enforce legal rights. As a general rule, neither party wants to spend energy and money to prove their case in court. Thus, an agreement on tolls pushes the parties to compromise their positions and settle down. This implicit threat of litigation, if negotiations fail, puts both sides under pressure to resolve the dispute. People who enter into a toll contract should check whether they can invalidate their liability insurance. The agreement should be drafted in such a way that the rights for which the statute of limitations has already expired are not revived and to ensure that the agreement only indicates the statute of limitations. The agreement should not include an admission of wrongdoing unless you have agreed. The threat of possible litigation is the elephant in space that makes an agreement on tolls effective. A savvy potential complainant may use this elephant as an advantage, as a potential accused may well lean back to not be prosecuted. If the parties agree on a toll agreement, the scope of the agreement is governed by the main provisions of the agreement, including the types of claims you could file against the co-accused. In product liability cases, you may be entitled to a contribution against co-defendants to ensure that your client does not pay more than his or her share of proportionate liability, which is assessed in joint and several liability jurisdictions. You may also have a tacit claim against a manufacturer if you are a downstream distributor or seller, or you are entitled to contractual compensation if your client has a defence and compensation contract. There may also be warranty requests.
Clear language will avoid disputes over the scope of the agreement. See z.B., Camico`s courage. In the. Co. v. Citizens Bank, 474 F.3d 989 (7th Cir. 2007). The plaintiff can take advantage of the defendant`s fear by asking the defendant to cooperate in another way. Thus, under the toll agreement, the applicant could require the defendant to provide documents and/or answer questions about the litigation. This mutual fear helps to bring the parties together and formally resolve the issue. Since an agreement is more likely under the toll agreement, the parties enjoy the benefits of litigation (threat of a possible money decision against the defendant) without initiating litigation or incurring costs.
The client`s consent is obviously necessary and involves commercial considerations and procedural strategies. For example, customers who deal with a co-accused may agree to a toll agreement because they do not want to sue a business partner, but they want to retain their rights. Conversely, some parties may never want to fight against someone they work with. In addition, some clients, who do not appear to share much responsibility for a particular case, may want to actively pursue a counter-action against the target accused.