


Reminder: BC Franchise Legislation in Effect February 1st, 2017
Reminder: BC Franchise Legislation in Effect February 1st, 2017
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
Automotive Webinar Series | Part III: Where Rubber Meets the Road: Automotive Litigation Update
At this session, our panel of experts will provide a panoramic view of the evolution of automotive class actions across Canada, a review of best practices for managing disputes with distributors and franchisees, and
insights into litigation and disclosure obligations arising from automotive industry labour issues.
Automotive Webinar Series | Part II: Looking towards the Future: Automotive Legislation Updates
Our panel of professionals will highlight important changes impacting the automotive industry in Canada’s ever-evolving regulatory landscape including updates to cross-border sales legislation, advertising obligations arising from drip pricing provisions under the Competition Act and understanding Transport Canada's lates enforcement tool: administrative monetary penalties.
Nothing Casual about it: Hotel Faces Employees’ Class Action over Employment Benefit Changes
Hotel faces employees' class action over employment benefit changes.
“Mend your speech a little, lest it may mar your fortunes”: Are Employee Defamation Cases A Fool’s Errand?
This bulletin discusses the recent decision in Williams v. Vac Developments Limited regarding gag defamation proceedings commenced by employers.
Overholding in Commercial Leasing
The concept of overholding is often misunderstood and deserves more attention in commercial leases, given the significant consequences for landlords and tenants.
Get updates delivered right to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time.