931 results found

A recent decision of the Superior Court of Justice, 3574423 Canada Inc. v. Baton Rouge Restaurants Inc., provides guidance on statutory disclosure obligations in situations when the right of first refusal (ROFR) over a new location is triggered.

In the 2025 case of Cervantes v Pizza Nova Take Out Ltd., the Ontario Superior Court of Justice granted certification of a proposed class proceeding against both a franchisor and its franchisees in respect...

On May 26, 2015, the Ontario government passed the Making Healthier Choices Act. This legislation created the Healthy Menu Choices Act (the Act), which will require regulated food service premises with 20 or more locations in Ontario that are selling prepared ready-to-eat food to post itemized caloric content on menus.

As a result of the existence of Ontario's franchise legislation (the concisely named Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000 (the "Act")).

The Arthur Wishart Act provides two potential remedies to franchisees in relation to franchisors' non-compliant disclosure document, the statutory remedies available.

To understand the reasoning behind the decision, it is helpful to examine the relationship between the Franchisor and its franchisees, as well as the rationale behind the Proposal.

IFS then approached the plaintiffs, all former Saab dealers under the GM arrangement, and recruited them to become Saab dealers once again.

In the first decision to consider the meaning of the "one-year/no-franchise fee" exemption in the "Arthur Wishart Act", the Ontario Court of Appeal has confirmed that a franchisor is not required to provide a franchisee with a disclosure document where the franchise agreement has a term of one year or less and where the franchisee does not pay any non-refundable fees in exchange for the franchise.

Franchisors can be reassured by a recent decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal (Dairy Queen Canada, Inc. v. M.Y. Sundae Inc.) ...

Contrary to what happens in many countries, the importance of this role is still, unfortunately, underestimated by many North American franchisors.

On June 23, 2022, significant changes were made to the Competition Act (Canada), two of which have a direct impact on many franchise agreements.

The typical duration of a franchise agreement has evolved since the 1980s, due in part to the increasingly rapid and far-reaching changes experienced by most franchise networks...

This bulletin is intended for franchisors, executives and managers of franchise networks

In the fifth video of our first-time funds series, Bernard Kwasniewski and Mitchell Dost of our Private Equity practice explore fund timelines and making investments.

Selecting the right franchisee is one of the most important jobs that a franchisor has. The financial success of your system, the reputation of your brand, and your ability to increas...

The Supreme Court of Canada recently found that the arbitration provision used by popular ridesharing service, Uber Technologies, Inc. (Uber), in its standard form agreement with its drivers...

The Quebec Superior Court in the recent case of Bertico Inc. v. Dunkin’ Brands Canada Ltd., ordered Dunkin’ Brands Canada Ltd., the franchisor, to pay more than C$16MM in damages, the full amount of their claim, to twenty-one former franchisees for repeatedly failing to protect and enhance the Dunkin’ Donuts brand in Quebec over the course of a decade.

On January 25, 2018, the Ontario Court of Appeal released the closely followed decision in Raibex Canada Ltd. v ASWR Franchising Corp. providing much needed clarity on the pre-contractual disclosure...