On competing summary judgment motions arising from the sale and continuation of a news kiosk franchise, the plaintiffs sought statutory recission of a later franchise agreement based on non-disclosure under the Arthur Wishart Act.
The court held that the October 2012 agreement was a new franchise agreement, not merely a renewal, extension, or transfer unaffected by the franchisor.
The franchisor failed to establish the claimed exemptions under ss. 5(7)(a)(iv), 5(7)(f), and 5(7)(g)(ii), particularly because the agreement contemplated payment of a franchise fee and involved new parties.
The plaintiffs' August 2013 rescission was within the two-year period under s. 6(2).
The plaintiffs obtained a declaration of entitlement to statutory recission and the defendants' motion to dismiss was denied.
