We use cookies on this site to enable your digital experience. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our cookie policy. close
Focus On
NEW In-House Counsel | Insurance | Intellectual Property | Immigration | Natural Resources | Real Estate | Tax

Raibex decision part II: Definition of ‘material fact’

Thursday, February 08, 2018 @ 9:04 AM | By Ben Hanuka

As elaborated in the first part of this article on Raibex Canada Ltd. v. ASWR Franchising Corp., the Court of Appeal for Ontario held that disclosure deficiencies justify rescission under subsection 6(2) of the Arthur Wishart Act if the franchisee cannot “make a properly informed decision on whether to invest in the franchise.”

Justice Gloria Epstein did not expressly identify the key facts underlying the court’s decision as “material facts” under the Act, although she referred to the motion judge’s characterization as material facts of certain disclosure omissions....