A Product Cannot Damage Itself: Ontario Court of Appeal Sets Aside Certification of Motor Vehicle Engine Class Action

May 12, 2025

Damage to a product resulting from a defect within the product constitutes presumptively unrecoverable pure economic loss. That is the conclusion of the Ontario Court of Appeal in North v. Bayerische Motoren Werke AG, 2025 ONCA 340 and an important appellate clarification of the limited circumstances in which compensation is available for allegations of product defect.

British Columbia Bill 4 Targeting Class Action Waivers and Arbitration Clauses Receives Royal Assent

May 12, 2025

On February 25, 2025, British Columbia introduced Bill 4, proposing significant amendments to the Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act (BPCPA).

BC Court of Appeal Confirms that the Duty of Honest Performance Does Not Extend to Pre-Contractual Dishonesty

April 08, 2025

In Ocean Pacific Hotels Ltd. v Lee, 2025 BCCA 57, the Court of Appeal for British Columbia confirmed that the duty of honest performance in contract does not extend to pre-contractual negotiations.

British Columbia Bill 4 Targets Class Action Waivers and Arbitration Clauses

March 21, 2025

On February 25, 2025, British Columbia introduced Bill 4, proposing significant amendments to the Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act (BPCPA). Bill 4 passed second reading on March 3, 2025. If enacted as proposed, the legislation would prohibit dispute resolution clauses and class action waiver clauses in consumer contracts.

BC Court of Appeal Confirms “No hire” Clause Not Intended to Injure Employees

March 11, 2025

In Latifi v The TDL Group Corp., 2025 BCCA 45, (Latifi) the BC Court of Appeal upheld the summary dismissal of a proposed class action against the Tim Hortons franchisor in Canada. The underlying dispute between the plaintiff, a former Tim Hortons employee, and the defendant TDL Group, concerned a “no hire” or “no poach” clause contained in the license agreement governing Tim Hortons franchisees. The clause prevents franchisees from employing anyone from another Tim Hortons franchise without the written approval of the defendant.