Customer Support: 800-526-4902
 
Home > Legal Library > Article




Join Matindale-Hubbell Connected


Ontario Court of Appeal Confirms Limitation Period for Rescission Actions Under Ontario’s Franchise Legislation




by:
Derek Ronde
Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP - Toronto Office

 
July 14, 2012

Previously published on July 12, 2012

The Ontario Court of Appeal recently heard an appeal of a decision Cassels discussed in its February 2012 e-Communique, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision in 2130489 Ontario Inc. v. Philthy McNasty’s (Enterprises) Inc. (2011 ONSC 6852). In the lower court decision, the court examined the issue of limitation periods in respect of statutory rescission claims under the Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000 (the “Act”), and held that, under the Limitations Act, 2002, a franchisee had two years from when (a) the franchisor rejects a valid rescission claim, or (b) sixty days expire from the delivery of the rescission notice, whichever is earlier, to bring an action against the franchisor.

On appeal, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the lower court decision and provided a precise description of how limitation periods in statutory rescission cases are to be determined once a valid notice of rescission has been issued: “Until the franchisor decides to not fulfil the obligations in s. 6(6), the franchisee has no cause of action for compensatory damages; at most, the franchisee has a latent or potential cause of action. Accordingly, the franchisee only has a cause of action at the earlier of (a) when the franchisor fails to pay compensation pursuant to s. 6(6) by the end of the 60 day period following the effective date of the Notice of Rescission or (b) when the franchisor communicates its refusal to do so at some point before expiry of the 60 days, as happened in this case.” Although it is rare for litigation to not immediately follow the issuance of a notice of rescission, the Court of Appeal has clearly determined that the franchisee’s knowledge that the franchisor will be resisting the notice of rescission is sufficient to start the clock for the purposes of the two-year notice period.

Again, this decision is helpful in clarifying the limitation period with respect to rescission actions. Even if a franchisee issues a notice of rescission within the appropriate time allowed, the franchisee still has to ensure that an action is brought as soon as that franchisee is aware that the franchisor will be disputing the rescission claim. Franchisors should pay close attention to this limitation period as a defence when dealing with rescission claims under Ontario’s franchise legislation.



 

The views expressed in this document are solely the views of the author and not Martindale-Hubbell. This document is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance.
 

View More Library Documents By...

 
Author
 
Derek Ronde
Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP
 
Toronto Office
 
Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP Overview


 

Practice Area Resource Centers
Visit our Practice Area Resource Centers to view practice area specific content compiled from a variety of legal sources. Find related articles, podcasts, industry leader insights and much more. We currently offer the following Practice Areas:Litigation;Intellectual Property;Real Estate;Corporate Law;Criminal Law;Bankruptcy;Immigration;Business Law;Insurance;Taxation;Labor & Employment;Commercial Law;Medical Malpractice;Trusts & Estates;Securities;International Law ;Health Care;Environmental Law;Construction Law;Workers' Compensation