The applicants appealed an arbitration award concerning a franchise dispute under the Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000 and alleged negligent misrepresentation in financial forecasts relating to a Canadian Tire store development.
They argued the arbitrator applied an incorrect legal test for negligent misrepresentation and erred in assessing reliance, causation, and damages.
The court held that the scope of review was limited to errors of law and concluded the arbitrator had effectively applied the correct test from Queen v. Cognos Inc. The arbitrator’s findings that the forecasts were not negligently prepared and that the applicants did not rely on them were factual determinations not subject to appeal.
The court also upheld the arbitrator’s approach to damages and the interpretation of the release provisions in the dealer contract.
