Insights Header image
Insights Header image
Insights Header image

Reminder: BC Franchise Legislation in Effect February 1st, 2017

January 2017 Franchise Bulletin 2 minute read

As of February 1, 2017, any company offering franchises in British Columbia must be in compliance with the province’s new franchise disclosure requirements, or risk serious consequences.  As set out in our previous bulletins from November 2015 and October 2016, British Columbia’s new Franchises Act (the “Franchises Act”) and accompanying Regulations come into force on that date, bringing not only a detailed set of disclosure requirements for franchisors, but also a host of remedies for franchisees to use when dealing with non-compliant franchisors.

Failure of a franchisor to provide adequate disclosure pursuant to the Franchises Act will permit  franchisees to rescind their franchise agreements for up to two years. Successful rescission claims may be extremely costly to franchisors, who may be on the hook for any losses of the franchisee during that time, including long term lease obligations. As such, we strongly recommend that franchisors consult their legal counsel now to ensure their disclosure documents are compliant with the Franchises Act, and making any necessary changes to their existing disclosure documents.

Franchisors currently operating in B.C. but not elsewhere in Canada, or franchisors who have not otherwise previously provided disclosure, will need to develop compliant disclosure documents in order to meet their obligations under the Franchises Act and avoid the risk of contravention.

Franchisors who are already providing compliant disclosure in provinces which have specific franchise legislation (Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island) will likely be substantially compliant with the Franchises Act. However, we recommend reviewing the applicable disclosure obligations under the Franchises Act carefully in order to avoid inadvertent contravention that may result from a failure to make necessary adjustments.

by Michael E. Reid and Dharampreet Dhillon, Articled Student

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 2017

Insights (5 Posts)View More

Featured Insight

Later Gator – Canada Seeks Critical Minerals Divestiture from Previous Divestiture Acquirer

The Government of Canada has applied to the courts in order to obtain a divestiture of a critical minerals investment under Canada's national security regime.

Read More
Mar 13, 2025
Featured Insight

Plan for the Ban: Global Plastics Pollution Treaty Negotiations on Pause

The United Nations’ efforts towards establishing a legally binding global plastics treaty have paused negotiations.

Read More
Mar 13, 2025
Featured Insight

Poisoned Workplace Leads to $25,000 in Damages

An employer was dinged with a $25,000 human rights damages award after it created a culture of intimidation and made sexually charged comments.

Read More
Mar 12, 2025
Featured Insight

Canada’s Final PFAS Report is Here

On March 5, 2025, the federal government published the final State of PFAS Report, proposing the defined class of PFAS be added to CEPA's toxic substances list.

Read More
Mar 12, 2025
Featured Insight

Convertible Debentures and SAFEs: Advantages and Disadvantages for Startup Financing

Two common financing methods for start-ups and early-stage companies are convertible debentures and SAFEs. Each one has important advantages and disadvantages.

Read More
Mar 11, 2025