Written By Stephanie Day and Jackson Spencer
Stay Up-To-Date
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.
Please note that this publication presents an overview of notable legal trends and related updates. It is intended for informational purposes and not as a replacement for detailed legal advice. If you need guidance tailored to your specific circumstances, please contact one of the authors to explore how we can help you navigate your legal needs.
For permission to republish this or any other publication, contact Amrita Kochhar at kochhara@bennettjones.com.