Lorsque le devoir de bonne foi s’invite dans un centre de soccer intérieur

ierres angulaires du droit contractuel (et précontractuel). La décision Ville de Sherbrooke c. Sherax Immobilier Inc., 2021 QCCS 5018, rappelle aux donneurs d’ouvrage publics qu’ils sont appelés à jouer un rôle actif dans le cadre d’appels d’offres, et plus particulièrement des partenariats de type public-privés. Ils ne peuvent se contenter de fournir des renseignements « à titre indicatif », et doivent orienter leurs décisions vers le succès du partenariat.

Exclusivity Clauses in Commercial Leases: Battle over the Types of Fitness Centres Permitted on the Leased Premises

By Sarah D. PinsonnaultIn 403-9971 Canada inc. c. Place Lasalle Property Corporation, 2014 QCCS 3153, the Plaintiff is a company that operates a “Curves” franchise in the shopping centre ran by Place Lasalle Property Corporation (“Defendant Landlord”). For those of you who don’t know, Curves is a ladies-only fitness and weight loss centre. It soon became known to the Plaintiff that Les Entreprises Éngergie Cardio Inc. (“Defendant Tenant”) signed a lease with the Defendant Landlord, whereby the Defendant Tenant would open another fitness centre in the same shopping centre. This new fitness facility, called “Econofitness”, is described as a “no-frills” gym that admits both men and women. As a result, the Plaintiff, in claiming an alleged contravention of an exclusivity clause found in its lease, sought a provisional injunction against the Defendant Landlord to prevent the latter from renting to the Defendant Tenant. AnalysisThe Court had to analyse, in accordance with the criteria… Lire la suite