09.01.2015 Views

UTGB Vol 5.pdf - Robson Hall Faculty of Law

UTGB Vol 5.pdf - Robson Hall Faculty of Law

UTGB Vol 5.pdf - Robson Hall Faculty of Law

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

In contrast to all Canadian franchise legislation, Australia's legislation requires<br />

that a franchisee attain independent legal advice prior to entering into a<br />

franchise agreement. Under s. 11(2) <strong>of</strong> the Trade Practices Act 1974, a<br />

franchisor must receive the following from the prospective franchisee prior to<br />

entering into the franchise agreement:<br />

(a) Signed statements, that the prospective franchisee has been given advice about the<br />

proposed franchise agreement or franchise business, by any <strong>of</strong>: (i) an independent legal<br />

adviser; (ii) an independent business adviser; (iii) an independent accountant; or<br />

(b) For each kind <strong>of</strong> statement not received under paragraph (a), a signed statement by<br />

the prospective franchisee that the prospective franchisee: (i) has been given that kind<br />

<strong>of</strong> advice about the proposed franchise agreement or franchised business; or {ii) has<br />

been told that that kind <strong>of</strong> advice should be sought but has decided not to seek it. 185<br />

The subsequent section qualifies subsection 2 by stating that its does not apply<br />

to the renewal or extension <strong>of</strong> a franchise agreement and that it does not<br />

prevent that franchisor from requiring any or all <strong>of</strong> the statements mentioned in<br />

paragraph 2(a). 186<br />

In formulating its own independent legal advice provision, Manitoba should<br />

follow Australia's example. A similar provision to the Reverse Mortgage<br />

Regulation would not go far enough to ensure that franchisees seek legal advice.<br />

In contrast, Australia's Act, by forcing franchisees to either seek advice or<br />

waive it, ensures that franchisees will seriously consider the possibility <strong>of</strong><br />

consulting an expert. In adopting the Australian clause, Manitoba should limit<br />

the qualified experts for consultation requirement to lawyers and accountants,<br />

since these are the two parties who are best suited to provide the necessary<br />

advice.<br />

In addition, Manitoba should introduce a cooling..<strong>of</strong>f period (in case the general<br />

cooling..<strong>of</strong>f period is not adopted) that applies only to those franchisees that<br />

waived attaining pr<strong>of</strong>essional consultation. Doing so will allow more time for<br />

franchisees left with the task <strong>of</strong> understanding the franchise agreement on their<br />

own to actually do so.<br />

Overall, Manitoba should introduce a provision forcing franchisees to seek<br />

independent legal advice prior to signing the franchise agreement to ensure that<br />

they make a well..informed decision. This will counter the power imbalance<br />

between franchisors and franchisees as well as reducing litigation arising out <strong>of</strong><br />

misunderstandings. This requirement will, however, be limited by a waiver, with<br />

which franchisees will be able to forego attaining independent legal advice.<br />

Furthermore, a cooling <strong>of</strong>f period should be granted to those franchisees who<br />

185<br />

Australia, Trade Practices (Industry Codes Franchising) Regulations 1998, supra note 50 at s.<br />

11(2).<br />

186<br />

Ibid. at s. 11(3) .

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!