We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 18

Ontario Court of Appeal provides guidance on the definition of "franchisor’s associate"

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 6 2013

A recent decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario (ONCA) helps define the concept of "control," as it relates to the definition of a "franchisor's

Ontario Court of Appeal considers scope of franchisor’s duty to disclose outside mandatory disclosure context

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • February 4 2013

In an important new decision for franchisors, 3574423 Canada Inc. v. Baton Rouge Restaurants Inc. (Baton Rouge), the Ontario Court of Appeal (ONCA

Ontario court considers franchise class action challenging scope of franchisors’ right to profit from franchisees

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • October 9 2012

In Spina v. Shoppers Drug Mart Inc., 2012 ONSC 5563, Justice Perell for the Ontario Superior Court has given judgment in the first stage of a class action certification motion brought on behalf of franchisees of Shoppers Drug Mart

Franchisors: what are you doing to protect your brand?

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • July 4 2012

If you are the owner of a franchise system and have recently seen the entry of an aggressive competitor into your market, there are lessons for you in the Québec Superior Court decision Bertico inc. v. Dunkin’ Brands Canada Ltd. released on June 21, 2012

The Court of Appeal clarifies interplay between the Limitations Act, 2002 and the Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 13 2012

In 2130489 Ontario Inc. v. Philthy McNasty's (Enterprises) Inc., the Ontario Court of Appeal clarified how the limitation period in the Limitations Act, 2002 (Limitations Act) interacts with the time periods for rescission set out in the Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000

Court specifically enforces franchisee’s right of renewal despite bitter personal dispute with franchisor

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 23 2012

A recent decision of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench 760437 Alberta Ltd. v. Fabutan Corporation (Fabutan) provides an important reminder to franchisors: the court may well order specific performance of a franchisee’s right of renewal despite the existence of a bitter dispute between representatives of the franchisor and franchisee

Obtaining a release when a franchise has gone sour

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 10 2012

In March, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released its decision on a motion for summary judgment in Dodd v. Prime Restaurants of Canada

Conduct after an arbitration award may nullify that award

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 1 2012

A party to a contract may terminate the contract and then start an arbitration to confirm the validity of the termination

Ontario court releases comprehensive and instructive decision in franchise class action proceeding

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • March 2 2012

In one of the most comprehensive decisions to date on a motion for certification of a class proceeding by franchisees against their franchisor, and on a motion for summary judgment by the franchisor to defeat those claims, the Ontario Superior Court, in Fairview Donut Inc. v. The TDL Group Corp., has provided some reassurances to franchisors when making important system-wide changes to their franchise networks

Court rules AWA applies only to post-act waivers, affirms franchisee duty of fair dealing

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • February 23 2012

Despite the retroactive nature of the Arthur Wishart Act (AWA) (Act), its anti-waiver provision only applies to rights purportedly waived after the date on which the AWA came into force, according to a recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice