Supreme Court of Canada clarifies the law of tort for pure economic losses and highlights the necessity of contracts
In 1688782 Ontario Inc. v. Maple Leaf Foods Inc. 2020 SCC 35, the Supreme Court of Canada concluded that franchisees could not make a claim against a supplier, Maple Leaf Foods, for the purely economic losses caused by potentially contaminated meats because they had not entered into a contract directly with Maple Leaf and Maple Leaf never undertook to provide them with edible meats. The Plaintiffs were franchisees of Mr. Sub. Under the franchise agreement, the franchisees were only allowed to purchase meat from the defendant unless they had Mr. Sub’s permission. While Mr. Sub had entered into a contract ... [more] Full article
Tim Hortons Franchisees Must Be Content With Profits from Coffee, Not Food
Tim Hortons franchisees have lost their challenge to Tim Hortons’ “Always Fresh” model that allegedly reduced the profitability of donuts, TimBits, and other food items. In Fairview Donut Inc. v. ... [more] Full article
Philthy McNasty’s case clarifies franchise limitations periods
Philthy McNasty's did not fare well when the Ontario Court of Appeal recently examined the issue of limitation periods in respect of statutory rescission claims under the Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000 (the "Act"). [more] Full article
Competition Law Year in Review 2010
Review of all Canadian Competition Law developments over the past year, plus some US developments, including: Mergers, Criminal, Private Actions, Reviewable Matters, Marketing Practices, The Long Arm of US Antitrust Top Stories
- Indirect purchasers cannot sue
- Damages no longer required?
- The wired and the wireless
- Winds of change
- Credit card rules challenged... priceless?
- Rebates, savings and gift cards