FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2026 filing

Burger King litigation history

What Burger King disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document. Item 3 lists the material legal actions a franchisor must report; Item 4 covers bankruptcy. This is the franchisor's own disclosure, not a court record, and not legal advice.

Items 3 (litigation) & 4 (bankruptcy) at a glance

What the filing discloses

Cases disclosed: 19; Item 3, as counted in the filing

Largest settlement, franchisor's own cases: None stated

Bankruptcy (Item 4): None; Franchisor, parent, predecessor or officer

Filing year: 2026; Disclosures cover the prior ten years

Extracted from the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document

Item 3: litigation

Two pending cases where BKC/predecessor is defendant (FIF v. BK Corp - $500M+ claim re alleged oral franchise agreement in Canada; Arrington - antitrust class action re no-solicitation clause). One franchisor-initiated suit (BKC v. Chaus - enforcement of franchise termination). Several concluded cases. Multiple affiliate cases not involving BKC directly.

Item 3 (litigation) · 19 matters disclosed · 11 pending listed

Litigation cases

The franchisor and its predecessor

Pending (2)

Arrington v. Burger King Worldwide, Inc.
pending
BK Corporation and various affiliates (Burger King Worldwide, Inc.; Restaurant Brands International Inc.) · filed 2019-03-15 · United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida · 18-24128-CV-MARTINEZ/AOR
“Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants violated Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act by incorporating an employee no-solicitation and no-hiring clause in the standard form Franchise Agreement all franchisees must sign. Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief and damages for themselves and other members of the class.”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
First International Fund Ltd. v. Burger King Corporation et al.
pending
BK Corporation (Burger King Corporation) · filed 2013-08-28 · Ontario Superior Court of Justice · CO-13-487734
“On August 28, 2013, First International Fund Ltd. (“FIF”), an entity owned by Marc Vaturi, President of Triple Five International Group Ltd., sued BK Corporation and BK Corporation’s former master franchisee in Canada. FIF alleges that on January 28, 2013, before the incorporation of FIF, Vaturi reached a binding verbal agreement with representatives of BK Corporation”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (2)

Burger King Company LLC (United States), Fast Food Sudamerica, S.A. (Argentina), Alsea Global, S.L. (Spain), Operadora Internacional Alsea S.A. de C.V. (Mexico) and Alsea S.A.B. de C.V. (Mexico)
judgment
filed 2023-12-19 · ICC (arbitration) · ICC Case No. 28320/PDP (EPP)
“On December 19, 2023, BKC, as franchisor, and Fast Food Sudamerica, S.A. (“FFS”), as franchisee, along with the Alsea Entities as guarantors, filed a Joint Request for Arbitration, stemming from a dispute involving existing franchise agreements and the development of Burger King® restaurant locations in Argentina.”Page 25 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Burger King Corporation vs. Burger Gulf Coast, LLC and Anand Patel
settled
Brought against a franchisee · BK Corporation (Burger King Corporation) · Miami-Dade County Circuit Court · 2021-002708-CA-01
“BK Corporation sued Defendants for breach of the Lease/Sublease Agreement and breach of the Guarantee for their failure to remit the insurance proceeds to it. The parties attended mediation on March 24, 2023 and a settlement agreement was entered into shortly thereafter.”Page 25 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Status not stated in the filing (1)

Burger King Company LLC v. Altaf A. Chaus
Brought against a franchisee · filed 2026-03-12 · United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida · 1:26-cv-21647-MD
“Franchisor-Initiated Suits: Enforcement of Franchise Termination Obligations: Burger King Company LLC v. Altaf A. Chaus, United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 1:26-cv-21647-MD, filed on March 12, 2026.”Page 25 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor

Pending (9)

ADP Direct Poultry Ltd. v. Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen, Inc., Restaurant Brands International Inc., Restaurant Services Canada Inc., Amjad Farooq Inc., et al.
pending
Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen, Inc. (PLK), with parent Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI) · filed 2025 · Ontario Superior Court of Justice · CV-25-00741914-0000
“On May 29, 2025, PLK and RBI were served with a Statement of Claim (amended on June 23, 2025) by ADP Direct Poultry Ltd., a former supplier of chicken to the Popeyes Canada franchise system. ADP’s comprehensive commercial claim alleges breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and honest performance in contractual relations, misrepresentations, conspiracy, negligence”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Daniel Pemberton v. Restaurant Brands International, Inc. & Restaurant Brands International US Services LLC
pending
Restaurant Brands International, Inc. (RBI) and Restaurant Brands International US Services LLC · filed 2025-05-02 · U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California · 4:25-cv-03647-JCS
“The complaint alleges that www.bk.com secretly allowed third-party advertising and analytics firms (Google, Meta/Facebook, Microsoft Clarity, Snap, The Trade Desk, AdTheorent and others) to place tracking cookies on visitors to the website, even after users opted out through the website’s cookie-consent banner.”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Payal Keswani and Kendra Sivertson v. PH Canada Company, Pizza Hut International, LLC, Domino’s Pizza, Inc., Domino’s Pizza of Canada Ltd., Little Caesar Enterprises, Inc., Little Caesar of Canada ULC, Papa John’s International, Inc., PIZZAPIZZA Limited, Fresh Slice Holdings Ltd., Popeyes Louisiana
pending
Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen, Inc. (PLK), with parent Restaurant Brands International, Inc. (RBI) · filed 2025-06-18 · Supreme Court of British Columbia · VLC-S-S-254553
“On June 18, 2025, a proposed class action was filed in the Supreme Court of British Columbia against PLK, RBI, and 10 other fast-food companies and their affiliates. The claim, brought under the Class Proceedings Act, alleges that the defendants used unlawful “drip pricing” tactics on their proprietary digital platforms.”Page 24 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Jonathan Deschatelets v Restaurant Brands International Inc., Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership and The TDL Group Corp.
pending
Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI), Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership, with affiliate The TDL Group Corp. · filed 2024-04-19 · Superior Court of Quebec · 500-06-001306-246
“On April 19, 2024 Plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit against Tim Hortons before the Superior Court of Quebec. Plaintiff is a consumer who has been using the Tim Hortons mobile application for several years. Plaintiff alleges that The TDL Group Corp. (“TDL”) sent an email to approximately 500,000 customers stating that they won a boat worth CAD $64,000 as part of the Roll Up To Win promotion.”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Liel Ohayon v. Starbucks Coffee Canada, Inc., Starbucks Corporation, Foodtastic Inc., (a.d.b.a. Second Cup), The TDL Group Corp., Restaurant Brands International Inc., and Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership
pending
Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI) and Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership (RBILP), with affiliate The TDL Group Corp. · filed 2024-12-30 · Superior Court of Quebec · 500-06-001351-242
“An application for authorization to institute a class action was filed on December 30, 2024 in the Superior Court of Quebec based on allegations of price-gouging for non-dairy milk substitutes in beverages by RBILP, RBI, TDL, and other food or beverage companies.”Page 24 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Plymouth County Retirement Association, Scott Hamparian, Emad Tadros and Zeiad Tadros V. Restaurant Brands International Inc., Matthew Perelman and Alexander Sloane
pending
Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI) · filed 2024-10-07 · Court of Chancery of State of Delaware · C.A. No 2024 – 1030
“Purported former shareholders of Carrols Restaurant Group, Inc. (“CRG”) filed a complaint in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against RBI and two individual directors that were on the board of CRG. The complaint alleges claims for breach of fiduciary duty by RBI, as a purported controlling shareholder of CRG engaging in unfair dealing leading to an unfair transaction”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Burger King Europe GmbH and Burger King Spain, S.L. vs. Kasba Internacional S.L. and Alfonso Manuel Arroyo Sanchez
pending
Brought against a franchisee · Burger King Europe GmbH (BKE), with its master franchisee Burger King Spain, S.L. · filed 2023-07-10 · Court of First Instance of Madrid · 1598/2023
“On July 10, 2023, BKE and its master franchisee in Spain, Burger King Spain, S.L. (“BKS”) filed a claim against a legacy Burger King franchisee in Spain, Kasba Internacional S.L. (“Kasba”) and its owner, Alfonso Manuel Arroyo Sanchez (“Arroyo”), seeking unpaid royalties and advertising fund contributions of EUR 3,565.94 in the aggregate and termination of the franchise agreement.”Page 25 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Olympia Tile International Inc. vs. Restaurant Brands International Inc., The TDL Group Corp., Ricky Leem and Gesco Limited Partnership
pending
Restaurant Brands International Inc. (RBI), with affiliate The TDL Group Corp. · filed 2020-09-25 · Ontario Court of Justice · CV-20-00648343-0000
“Plaintiff is claiming damages of $3,500,000 and $500,000 in punitive damages on the basis of breach of contract, intentional interference in economic relations, and fraudulent misrepresentation and conspiracy arising from inventory allegedly purchased on behalf of Tim Hortons/its franchisees in reliance of its forecasted demand of these tiles for its renovation program.”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Mister Crab s.r.l., Krusty s.r.l. and Gianni Ugolini vs Burger King Europe GmbH, Burger King SEE (Switzerland) AG and Burger King Restaurants Italia s.r.l.
pending
Brought by a franchisee · Burger King Europe GmbH (BKE) · Milan Tribunal · 33924/2024
“The claimants allege that certain of the clauses of the franchise agreements, including in particular the clauses which provide for payment of royalties and advertising contributions calculated as a percentage of gross sales, should be declared void, and consequently that the royalties and advertising contributions paid by Mister Crab over the years be reimbursed.”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (1)

QSR Services Corp. vs Burger King Restaurants of Canada Inc.
settled
Brought by a franchisee · Burger King Restaurants of Canada Inc. (“Canada”) · filed 2012-11-29 · Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada · CHI-S-S-25495
“QSR Services Corp. (“QSR”), a former franchisee of Burger King Restaurants of Canada Inc. (“Canada”), commenced a lawsuit in British Columbia, claiming damages for loss of profit and loss of capital/sale price, totaling CAD $863,000 as a result of the alleged encroachment/reduction of sales at one of QSR’s restaurants allegedly due to the reopening of a restaurant”Page 26 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

This list shows 15 of the 19 matters Item 3 discloses; the rest are in the filing.

Item 3 lists the litigation the franchisor must disclose; a matter against a parent, an affiliate or a named officer is not a matter against the franchisor, and pending claims are allegations, not findings.

Disclosure signals that moved the score

How this shows up in the verdict

No going concern issues reported, but absence of average gross sales/net income data prevents fundamental financial viability assessment

The verdict grade is FranchiseVerdict's editorial assessment across SBA loan performance, unit growth, revenue and disclosure signals. It is not investment advice.

Before you weigh a lawsuit

How to read Item 3

A franchisor must disclose pending actions and any material civil action involving the franchise relationship, plus convictions or civil judgments for fraud, unfair or deceptive practices, or franchise-law violations, going back ten years. A case the franchisor brought against a franchisee counts too. Item 3 does not include every dispute: settled claims below the materiality line and matters resolved in private arbitration can be absent.

Questions worth asking current and former franchisees, using the contact list in Item 20:

Were you, or anyone you know in the system, party to a dispute with the franchisor?
Was it resolved by settlement, arbitration or a court, and on what terms?
Has the number of disputes gone up or down since you signed?

Back to the Burger King verdict Risk analysis on the brand page Franchisee contacts for due-diligence calls