A & K Lick-A-Chick Franchise Ltd. v. Cordiv Enterprises Ltd., Divito and Cordeau, (1981) 44 N.S.R.(2d) 159 (TD)

• Judge: Richard, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: January 09, 1981
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (1981), 44 N.S.R.(2d) 159 (TD)

A&K Lick-A-Chick v. Cordiv Ent. (1981), 44 N.S.R.(2d) 159 (TD);

    83 A.P.R. 159

MLB headnote and full text

A & K Lickachick Franchises Limited v. Cordiv Enterprises Limited, Divito and Cordeau

(No. 27891)

Indexed As: A & K Lick-A-Chick Franchise Ltd. v. Cordiv Enterprises Ltd., Divito and Cordeau

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

Trial Division

Richard, J.

January 9, 1981.

Summary:

This case arose out of the plaintiff franchising company's action to enforce a franchise agreement against a franchisee. The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, dismissed the action on the ground that the franchise agreement was unconscionable and void.

Contracts - Topic 4701

Discharge on termination - By notice - General - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, held that a contract, which has no fixed term, is determinable on reasonable notice - See paragraphs 28 to 29.

Contracts - Topic 9204

Unconscionable transactions relief - General principles - Requirement of inequality in bargaining position plus improvident transaction - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, held that a transaction is unconscionable, if it is sufficiently divergent from community standards or manifests a substantial inequality of bargaining power between the parties - See paragraphs 24 to 27.

Contracts - Topic 9353

Unconscionable transactions relief - Conditions for relief - Unequal bargaining positions - What constitutes - The plaintiff franchiser induced one of its franchisees to enter a new franchising agreement by using threats of competition, where the franchisee was already in an insecure business position and was prevented from seeking independent advice - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, held that the franchisee was in an inferior bargaining position to the franchisor - See paragraphs 24 to 27.

Cases Noticed:

Llanelly Railway and Dock Company v. London and Northwestern Railway Company (1872-73), 8 L.R., ch. App. 942, not folld. [para. 28].

Martin-Baker Aircraft Co. Ltd. v. Canadian Flight Equipment Ltd. et al., [1955] 2 Q.B. 556, appld. [para. 28].

Counsel:

Ross H. Haynes, for the plaintiff;

Ronald N. Pugsley, for the defendants.

This case was heard on December 8 and 9, 1980, at Halifax, Nova Scotia, before RICHARD, J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, who delivered the following judgment on January 9, 1981: