British Columbia Bill 4 Targets Class Action Waivers and Arbitration Clauses

Bennett Jones LLP
Contact

Bennett Jones LLP

[co-author: Stephanie Day - Articling Student]

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.

If enacted, Bill 4 will prohibit suppliers from including terms in consumer contracts that prevent consumers from commencing or becoming a class member of a class proceeding relating to a matter arising out of the consumer transaction (Section 14.3). Similarly, clauses that require a consumer to submit any dispute arising out of the consumer contract to arbitration or alternate dispute resolution processes before a dispute arises will be deemed void. This prohibition will also apply to “low value claims” in non-consumer contracts, a new concept for claims less than an amount to be prescribed in future regulations. Dispute resolution or class action waiver clauses agreed to before a dispute arising in such claims will be inoperative (Section 14.4).

These features of Bill 4 are retrospective and would apply to contracts entered into before, on, or after the act comes into force. Bill 4 would also make it an offence to contravene either section.

If passed, Bill 4 will align British Columbia with other provinces including Ontario, Quebec, Alberta and Saskatchewan. The expansion to low-value claims in non-consumer contracts goes beyond the approach taken in those provinces. The Class Actions Quick Takes Blog will continue to track Bill 4’s progress through Parliament.

Have time to read more?

  • Bill 4 defines “consumer contracts” to mean all contracts relating to a “consumer transaction.” The definition relies on the existing definition for a “consumer transaction” under the BPCPA, meaning the “supply of goods or services or real property by a supplier to a consumer for purposes that are primarily personal, family, or household.”
  • Bennett Jones has written recently about the enforceability of arbitration clauses generally, and the test for obtaining a stay of a court proceeding in favour of having an arbitral tribunal decide questions of jurisdiction.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations. Attorney Advertising.

© Bennett Jones LLP

Written by:

Bennett Jones LLP
Contact
more
less

PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA NOW

  • Increased visibility
  • Actionable analytics
  • Ongoing guidance

Bennett Jones LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide