The Quebec Court of Appeal's decision in Dunkin'
Brands Canada Ltd. v. Bertico et al.1 is of
tremendous importance, as it undertakes an in-depth and thorough
examination of the rights and obligations of the parties to a
franchise agreement.
The judgment is the culmination of a decade-long court battle
that Langlois Kronström Desjardins and Fasken Martineau waged
on behalf of 32 Dunkin Donuts franchisees.
The franchisee plaintiffs suffered a steady and progressive
deterioration of their operating results during the 1990s, to the
point where, without vigorous intervention, their outlets seemed
doomed to disappear altogether. They naturally turned to their
franchisor for assistance and support. But despite numerous
discussions, the franchisees did not receive the assistance and
support to which they felt they were entitled from the franchisor.
They concluded that Dunkin' Donuts had effectively abandoned
them by not performing its contractual obligations, and
