The defendants appealed a Master's order that granted the plaintiffs leave to amend their statement of claim to add new defendants and new claims regarding supplier contributions to an advertising fund, and ordered related documentary production.
The Superior Court of Justice allowed the appeal in part.
The court found that adding a new corporate defendant on the eve of trial constituted an abuse of process given the extensive delays in the nine-year-old franchise dispute.
The court also held that the Master erred in allowing the amendments regarding supplier contributions, as they constituted a new cause of action that was statute-barred and not legally tenable under the clear terms of the franchise agreements.
The Master's orders adding the new party and allowing the supplier contribution amendments were set aside.