Amir Sammi entered into a franchise agreement with Timothy's (a coffee business) to operate a store in the Lake beach Shopping Centre in Montreal. Timothy's had a lease with four years remaining for a location on the third floor of the shopping center. Sammi became a sublessee under Timothy's lease. The franchise agreement expired on the same date as the sublease even though a traditional franchise agreement runs for 10 years to allow enough time for the franchisee to recoup his investment. Concerned about the short term remaining on the lease and the franchise, Timothy's granted Sammi an option to extend the sublease and the franchise if Timothy's renewed its lease with the mall owner. In the year prior to the expiry of the lease, Sammi left repeated messages for Timothy's regarding the renewal of the lease.

These messages were unanswered and representatives of Timothy's asked Lake beach not to pass on information about lease negotiations to Saromi. In the meantime, Timothy's was negotiating with Lakebeach and entered into a lease for a location on the second floor. Timothy's signed an agreement with a new franchisee for that location. Eventually, Sammi was advised that his franchise agreement would end at the expiry of the third-floor lease as Timothy's was unable to renew the lease for that location. Sammi brought legal action against Timothy's. What is the basis of the action against Timothy's? Evaluate Sammi's chances of success. If Sammi is successful, what remedy or remedies can he expect?

1) Identify the primary issue or issue(s) of a legal nature that the question raises. Explain the law relating to the legal issue. In some respects this may essentially involve reproducing (by way of some combination of paraphrase/reproduction) a relevant legal test or definition.

2) Provide analysis/argument based the on the applicable law that applies to the circumstance. Or, to state in the reverse, apply the relevant facts to the law in the analysis. Provide it first for the party that would likely be initiating any matter and then for the party that would be offering a defense. It will not always be the case that this structure will work in every circumstance- as needed I'll provide any further instructions for a response approach for that week.

3) Provide a conclusion based on your analysis explaining why you have arrived at the conclusion.

4) Consider any relevant risk management comments you might provided. To be clear- you should also state there are no risk management considerations you are offering.

1) Identify the primary issue or issue(s) of a legal nature that the question raises. Explain the law relating to the legal issue. In some respects this may essentially involve reproducing (by way of some combination of paraphrase/reproduction) a relevant legal test or definition.

2) Provide analysis/argument based the on the applicable law that applies to the circumstance. Or, to state in the reverse, apply the relevant facts to the law in the analysis. Provide it first for the party that would likely be initiating any matter and then for the party that would be offering a defense. It will not always be the case that this structure will work in every circumstance- as needed I'll provide any further instructions for a response approach for that week.

3) Provide a conclusion based on your analysis explaining why you have arrived at the conclusion.

4) Consider any relevant risk management comments you might provided. To be clear- you should also state there are no risk management considerations you are offering.