Canada: The Ontario Superior Court Certifies A Class Action Brought By Former Franchisees

Justice Strathy of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice recently certified a class proceeding brought by former General Motors car dealership franchisees against General Motors of Canada Ltd. ("GMC") and Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP ("Cassels"). The decision illustrates the growing trend of class proceedings stemming from the franchisor/franchisee relationship, as well as the more rare circumstance of legal counsel being defendants to a class proceeding.


The class proceeding arose from the economic downturn and the financial bailout provided by the governments of the United States and Canada to the distressed automaker in 2009. Upon the insistence of the federal and Ontario governments that it fundamentally reorganize its business, GMC informed 240 of its franchisees in May 2009 that their dealer agreements would not be renewed and instead offered franchisees a wind-down package.

The representative plaintiff, Trillium, was one of the GMC dealers that entered into a Wind-Down Agreement ("WDA")1 with GMC in May 2009 and voluntarily terminated its dealership agreement. Trillium sought to represent a class composed of dealers who similarly signed the WDA, claiming that GMC breached its obligations under the Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure) 2000 S.O. 2000 c. 3 (the "Arthur Wishart Act") and comparable franchise legislation in Alberta and Prince Edward Island. Trillium also alleged that Cassels had been retained to act on behalf of the GMC dealers' Canadian Automotive Dealers' Association ("CADA"), and drafted a memo to the dealers and participated in a conference call in May 2009. However, by virtue of the fact that Cassels had also been retained by the Canadian government to provide advice on the GMC bailout negotiations, Cassels had an undisclosed conflict of interest and breached duties that it owed to the terminated dealers.

The Plaintiff's claims against GMC

Trillium claimed that GMC breached its duties under the Arthur Wishart Act and the legislation's counterparts in Alberta and PEI2 In particular, it was asserted that the WDA was a "franchise agreement" as defined in the legislation, and that GMC failed to deliver a disclosure document 14 days before a franchisee was required to execute the WDA, pursuant to section 5(1). Instead, GMC adopted a strategy designed to keep franchisees "in the dark" concerning GMC's financial position. Damages were claimed for breach of the statutory duty of fair dealing and interference with the right of association, and Trillium sought a declaration that class members could rescind the WDA due to the failure of GMC to provide a disclosure document.

The Plaintiff's claims against Cassels

It was pleaded that Cassels had failed to properly advise and represent class members, largely by failing to inform franchisees of their rights under the Arthur Wishart Act and in developing a collective response to the WDA. As a result of its breach of contract and negligence, the plaintiffs claimed that Cassels deprived all class members of the opportunity to obtain a more advantageous negotiated wind-down. Moreover, by advising the Canadian government in the bailout negotiations, that Cassels was in an undisclosed conflict of interest (since the bailout was conditional on GMC taking a more aggressive approach to restructuring of its dealership network) and was not in a position to provide independent and impartial advice. It was asserted that this constituted a breach of fiduciary duty.3

The Certification Motion

After addressing the applicable provisions of the Arthur Wishart Act and the purpose of the legislation, Justice Strathy commented on the intersection of franchisee claims and the Class Proceedings Act, 2002 S.O. 2002 c. 6 (the "CPA"). In particular, his Honour quoted the authors of the Ontario Law Reform Commission in 1982, who noted the particular suitability of claims by franchisees for class action treatment. After reviewing prior Ontario class actions involving the franchise relationship,4 Justice Strathy applied the five-part test for certification under section 5 of the CPA.

The Pleadings Disclosed Causes of Action

The Plaintiff asserted three claims under the applicable franchise legislation, namely a claim of breach of the duty of fair dealing, breach of right of association, and breach of the franchisor's obligation of disclosure. On the certification motion GMC only contested the latter claim under section 5 of the Arthur Wishart Act with respect to the provision of a disclosure document. First, it was argued that the disclosure obligation is directed only to a "prospective franchisee" and not to an amendment of an existing franchise agreement. Second, GMC contested the Plaintiff's position that the WDA was a "franchise agreement" so as to trigger the disclosure document obligation, characterizing the WDA as akin to a settlement. In addition, GMC had historically maintained that its dealership agreements were not "franchise agreements" and subject to the Arthur Wishart Act; notwithstanding this fact, the WDA provided that the dealer released all rights under the statute or similar legislation. On the motion, GMC conceded that its dealers were subject to the Arthur Wishart Act.

After noting that the issues raised were novel, Justice Strathy held that it was not plain and obvious that the disclosure obligation did not arise by virtue of the WDA, noting "it does not strike me as unreasonable, or inconsistent, with the statutory purpose" to suggest that GMC had an obligation to make "full and fair disclosure of all material facts known to it that might reasonably affect the franchisee's decision" to enter into the WDA.

With respect to the claims against Cassels, the law firm argued that Trillium had failed to plead the particulars of the cause of action for breach of contract. The terms of the Cassels retainer were disputed, Cassels taking the position that the retainer by CDA was limited to providing advice in the event of a bankruptcy or insolvency of GMC. However, the pleading was read generously by Justice Strathy and allowed to stand. The pleading of negligence was also allowed to proceed. Cassels argued that since each dealer retained counsel in connection with the WDA, there was no proximity or reliance on Cassels nor any causal connection with anything Cassels did (or failed to do) and any damages. However, Justice Strathy referred to the "developing line of authority" permitting a party to assert a claim of negligence against a lawyer where there is no retainer and no direct solicitor-client relationship between the plaintiff and the lawyer.5 He held that it was arguable that Cassels brought itself into a relationship of sufficient proximity to owe the dealers a duty of care, and that the matter was best left for consideration at trial on a full evidentiary record.

Finally, Justice Strathy quickly concluded that the allegations of breaches of the fiduciary obligation of undivided loyalty that are "at the heart of the lawyer-client relationship" were properly pleaded.

Common Issues

In determining whether the claims raised common issues under section 5(1)(c) of the CPA, Justice Strathy noted that the claims arose from a series of events that culminated in May 2009, from a franchise agreement and a WDA that was common to all members of the proposed class, and the conduct of GMC and Cassels that was substantially uniform in relation to all members of the proposed class. Consequently, the proposed common issues with respect to the claims against GMC were held to be appropriate, including:

  • whether GMC was a franchisor within the meaning of the franchise statutes;
  • whether the class members were entitled to the benefit of the statutory duty of fair dealing and if GMC breached the duty;
  • whether GMC breached the dealers' right of association; and
  • whether GMC was required to deliver a disclosure document to the dealers under the WDA, and if so, whether each class member in Ontario, Alberta and PEI is entitled to rescind/cancel the WDA

Of particular note was the approved common issue of whether the Release found in the WDA was void and unenforceable under sections 46 and 117 of the Arthur Wishart Act. With respect to the proposed common issue of whether damages against GMC were to be assessed in the aggregate, Justice Strathy left the issue of aggregate assessment to the trial judge, noting that "this is not a case in which the certification of the action hinges on the availability of an aggregate assessment" and individual assessment would "not be insurmountable."

Similarly, Justice Strathy identified as common to the class members the issues of whether Cassels was in a solicitor/client relationship with the class members, and if it owed a contractual duty, fiduciary duty, or a duty of care to the class and if those duties were breached.

After noting the Court of Appeal's finding in Quizno's Canada Restaurant Corp. v. 2038724 Ontario Ltd. as to the suitability of a franchise claim to class action treatment, Justice Strathy concluded that a trial of the common issues would advance the litigation and a class proceeding was the preferable procedure.

This decision adds to the growing list of franchise claims to have been certified by the courts in recent years.


1. The dealer agreements and WDA incorporated Ontario law. However, the franchisee legislation in Alberta and PEI invalidates contractual terms that exclude the application of the law of that province, and accordingly the law of those provinces was considered to the extent it differed from the Ontario statute.

2. Arthur Wishart Act (Franchisee Disclosure), 2002 S.O. c. 3; Franchises Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. F-23; Franchises Act, R.S.P.E.I. 1988, c. F-14.1

3. The Plaintiff plead that each partner of Cassels knew or ought to have known of the firm's alleged conflict of interest, and asserted a personal claim and served the Statement of Claim personally on each partner.

4. Justice Strathy addressed Rosedale Motors Inc. v. Petro-Canada Inc. [1998] O.J. No. 5461 (Gen. Div.) rev'd [2001] O.J. No. 5368 (Div. Ct.), 909787 Ontario Ltd. v. Bulk Barn Foods Ltd., [1999] O.J. No. 2973 (S.C.J.) rev'd [2000] O.J. No. 3649 (Div. Ct.), Mont-Bleu Ford Inc. v. Ford Motor Co. of Canada, [2000] O.J. No. 1815 (Div. Ct.), 1176560 Ontario Ltd. v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Company of Canada Ltd., [2002] O.J. No. 4781 (S.C.J.) aff'd [2004] O.J. No. 865 (Div. Ct.), 2038724 Ontario Ltd. v. Quizno's Canada Restaurant Corp. (2010), 100 O.R. (3d) 721 (C.A.), 578115 Ontario Inc. v. Sears Canada Inc., [2010] O.J. No. 3921 (S.C.J.) and 1250264 Ontario Inc. v. Pet Valu Canada Inc. 2011 ONSC 297.

5. Citing Robinson v. Rochester Financial Limited, 2010 ONSC 463, CC&L Dedicated Enterprise Fund (Trustee of) v. Fisherman, [2001] O.J. No. 4622 (S.C.J.)

6. Section 4(4) states "any provision in a franchise agreement or other agreement relating to a franchise which purports to interfere with, prohibit or restrict a franchisee from exercising any right under this section [right of association] is void"

7. Section 11 holds that "any purported waiver or release by a franchisee of a right given under this Act or of any obligation or requirement imposed on a franchisor or franchisor's associate by or under this Act is void"

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.