Advisory Council Recommends that Ontario Government Clarify Provisions of the Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000
The Ontario government recently established an advisory body called the Business Law Modernization and Burden Reduction Council (the Council) to make recommendations to the government on how to modernize Ontario’s corporate and commercial laws.
The Council has made several recommendations to the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services, including that the government consider amending the Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000 (the Act) in order to “clarify existing ambiguities and codify existing business practices”.
More specifically, the Council recommends in its brief report that the government consider amending the Act (and the related regulations) to “prescribe”:
- The manner of determining “Total Initial Investment” for the purposes of the minimum and large investment thresholds;
- Any changes to the minimum and large investment thresholds amounts for exemptions from disclosure;
- The amount of the deposit payment under which fully refundable deposit agreements that does not bind a prospective franchisee to enter into a franchise agreement
- would be exempt from disclosure;
- The information that must be contained in a Statement of Material Change; and
- The accounting standards for financial statements that must be included in the Disclosure Document.
Although the recommended changes are all “house-keeping” in nature, they will hopefully provide additional clarity to both franchisors and franchisees on the above-noted subjects.
The Ministry is welcoming public feedback on the proposals until November 26, 2019. The full report is available and comments on the proposals can be provided online here.
We anticipate that the recommendations will likely result in a proposed bill being tabled early in 2020, and that the changes will become effective sometime during the spring or summer of 2020. We will keep you posted as to the specific amendments that are ultimately adopted.
by John Clifford, Brad Hanna and Rupin Sawhney
A Cautionary Note
The foregoing provides only an overview and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are cautioned against making any decisions based on this material alone. Rather, specific legal advice should be obtained.
© McMillan LLP 2019
Insights (5 Posts)
Bidders can Structure Offers to Discourage the Use of Rights of First Refusal
A recent Ontario Court of Appeal decision considers the duty of good faith and honest contractual performance in the context of an asset sale involving ROFRs.
Update for Ontario Employers: Proposed Changes Related to Remote Workers
Ontario employer's should note proposed amendments to the province's employment laws that would clarify remote employees' entitlements in mass terminations.
Trademark of Foreign Owner Invalidated on the Basis of Bad Faith
Awareness of a senior rights holder’s trademark and its prior use of such trademark in Canada is relevant to the assessment of bad faith.
Fanning the Flames of Liability: The Ontario Court of Appeal Considers Product Liability Issues in Burr v. Tecumseh Products of Canada Limited
The decision of the Court of Appeal in Burr v. Tecumseh Products of Canada Limited, 2023 ONCA 135 provides a helpful overview of product liability law.
A Look at Some Key Findings by the Alberta Securities Commission in Re Bison Acquisition Corp.
On December 21, 2021, a panel of the Alberta Securities Commission issued its written decision providing its reasons for the oral ruling it made on July 12, 2021 regarding applications brought by Bison Acquisition Corp. and Brookfield Infrastructure Corporation Exchange Limited Partnership, as well as Inter Pipeline Ltd. and Pembina Pipeline Corporation.
Get updates delivered right to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time.