This bill amends Nova Scotia’s Consumer Protection Act to require manufacturers (and, where applicable, importers or distributors) to make replacement parts, repair services and repair information available to purchasers for a “reasonable period” after sale. It outlaws technological or contractual barriers that unreasonably prevent or discourage repair and prevents warranties from being conditioned on using manufacturer‑authorized repair only.
The measure gives the Governor in Council broad regulatory authority to define which products are covered, set minimum availability periods and specify the parts, tools and information that must be provided. The Act also establishes purchaser remedies — repair, replace or refund — to be carried out according to regulations and will come into force by proclamation.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill obliges manufacturers to supply replacement parts, repair services and repair information (explicitly including software, firmware and security codes) and requires repair information to be provided electronically at no charge. It forbids software locks, contractual clauses, or other measures that have the purpose or effect of unreasonably preventing repair, and disallows warranty clauses that force repairs to be done only by manufacturer‑authorized providers.
Who It Affects
Applies to manufacturers and, where the manufacturer does not operate in Canada, to importers and distributors; independent repair shops and third‑party parts suppliers; retailers who sell consumer products; and Nova Scotia consumers who purchase goods that may require maintenance or repair.
Why It Matters
This is a provincial framework that expands access to repair resources and protects consumers from contract and technical lock‑ins, while leaving most operational detail to regulations — meaning the practical scope, timelines and exceptions will hinge on regulatory design. It will alter product servicing, aftermarket parts markets and manufacturer compliance obligations.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill inserts a new, focused set of obligations into the Consumer Protection Act. It defines key terms (consumer product; manufacturer; repair information) so that the rule applies not only to domestic manufacturers but also to importers or distributors when the original manufacturer is not present in Canada. "Repair information" is defined broadly to include manuals, diagrams, diagnostic data, software, firmware, security codes and updates — language that brings digital and software‑dependent products into the law’s reach.
Under the core obligation, manufacturers must make available replacement parts, repair services and the repair information necessary to diagnose, maintain or repair the product for a reasonable period after sale. The bill requires parts and services to be offered at a reasonable price and mandates that repair information be provided electronically without charge.
When practicable, replacement parts must be installable with commonly available tools and without causing irreversible damage to the product, which pushes design toward user‑serviceable components.The bill directly targets anti‑repair tactics. It bars any technological, contractual or other measure that unreasonably prevents or discourages repair.
The text calls out examples: software that blocks third‑party parts, restrictions on diagnostic information, and clauses that require exclusive use of manufacturer‑authorized repair providers. On warranties, the bill stops manufacturers from conditioning coverage on using authorized repair channels and prevents a warranty being voided merely because someone other than the manufacturer repaired the product or used a compatible third‑party part; the manufacturer can still deny coverage for damage proved to result from an improper repair or incompatible part.If a manufacturer fails to meet its obligations, the purchaser gains statutory remedies: they may require repair within a prescribed period at no charge, request replacement with equivalent functionality, or seek a refund — but the exact timing, notice and dispute resolution steps are to be set out in regulations.
Those regulations are also the vehicle for defining covered product classes, setting minimum availability windows, listing which parts or software must be supplied, and carving out exceptions on safety, privacy and cybersecurity grounds. The Act comes into force by proclamation, so implementation timing will depend on the government’s regulatory work and rollout decisions.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Section 26B requires manufacturers to supply replacement parts, repair services and repair information for a “reasonable period” after sale; repair information must be provided electronically and without charge.
Section 26C prohibits technological or contractual measures that have the purpose or effect of unreasonably preventing or discouraging repair and explicitly bans software that prevents installation or operation of replacement parts.
Section 26D forbids conditioning a warranty on repairs being performed only by the manufacturer or its authorized providers, and prevents voiding a warranty solely because a purchaser or third party performed a repair or used a compatible third‑party part (subject to proof of damage from improper repair).
Section 26E gives purchasers statutory remedies — require repair at no charge within a prescribed period, replacement with equivalent functionality, or refund — but delegates timelines and procedures to regulations.
Section 26F gives the Governor in Council broad power to define covered products, set minimum availability periods and required parts/tools/software, prescribe disclosure rules, and establish safety/privacy/cybersecurity exceptions.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Scope and key definitions
This section sets the statute’s perimeter by defining "consumer product," "manufacturer" and "repair information." Notably, a manufacturer includes an importer or distributor when the original maker is absent from Canada, which prevents offshore manufacturers from evading obligations simply by lacking a local presence. "Repair information" is deliberately wide — it names software, firmware, security codes and updates — which means any supplier of digitally enabled goods will need to consider how much diagnostic and software‑related material it must disclose.
Availability of parts, services and no‑cost repair information
This provision creates the main supplier obligation: manufacturers must make replacement parts, repair services and repair information available for a reasonable period after sale, with parts and services at a reasonable price. Repair information must be provided electronically without charge, and replacement parts should be installable with commonly available tools where reasonably practicable. The undefined standards "reasonable period" and "reasonable price" leave significant detail to the regulatory process and raise immediate compliance questions — for example, how long parts for different product categories must be held and how to price hard‑to‑source components.
Ban on anti‑repair measures
Section 26C bars technological, contractual or other measures that purposefully or effectively discourage or block repair, and gives concrete examples: software locks that prevent third‑party parts, restrictions on diagnostic information, and contractual clauses forcing repairs to authorized networks. The statutory test combines intent and effect, which broadens enforceability but also creates interpretive work for regulators and courts when assessing measures tied to software updates, remote authentication systems or end‑user license agreements.
Warranty protections and limits
This section prevents manufacturers and sellers from conditioning warranty coverage on exclusive use of manufacturer‑authorized repair providers and stops voiding warranties solely because a third party conducted a repair or a compatible non‑brand part was used. The manufacturer retains a defense when it proves the damage resulted from improper repair or an incompatible part, so disputes will often hinge on technical causation and the evidentiary burden to show improper work or incompatibility.
Purchaser remedies for non‑compliance
When manufacturers fail to meet their obligations and a product requires repair, this section lets the purchaser require the manufacturer to repair the product within a prescribed period and without charge, replace it with equivalent functionality, or refund the purchase price — but it ties those remedies to regulations for timing and process. The regulatory delegation means the practical availability of these remedies (notice requirements, standards for "equivalent functionality," dispute resolution and enforcement pathways) will be determined after the Act is passed.
Regulation‑making powers and exceptions
The Governor in Council is given broad regulation‑making authority: define which product classes are covered, set the required availability periods and specify required parts, tools, software and information; prescribe disclosure obligations; and identify circumstances (including safety, privacy or cybersecurity) where technological measures do not breach the anti‑repair prohibition. That discretion allows the government to calibrate scope and carve out legitimate safety or security constraints, but it also concentrates the implementation details—and much of the law’s practical effect—in secondary regulations rather than the statute itself.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Independent repair shops and technicians — they gain access to official repair information and compatible parts, expanding their ability to service modern products and compete with manufacturer‑authorized networks.
- Consumers and device owners — greater access to parts and diagnostic information can lower repair costs, extend product lifespans and reduce the need to buy replacements.
- Aftermarket parts suppliers — clearer legal access to supply channels and a statutory market for replacement parts supports business growth in the secondary parts market.
- Municipal waste‑reduction and environmental programs — increased repairability can reduce electronic waste and extend the useful life of consumer goods, supporting circular‑economy goals.
Who Bears the Cost
- Manufacturers, importers and distributors — they will face compliance costs to catalog and publish repair information, stock parts for prescribed periods, change product design to allow non‑destructive installation and defend privileges tied to software/IP.
- Authorized service networks — branded repair centers may lose exclusive service revenue as purchasers and independent shops gain access to parts and information.
- Government regulators — Nova Scotia (and potentially federal partners) must draft detailed regulations, monitor compliance and resolve disputes, creating administrative and enforcement expenses.
- Retailers and sellers — they may need to update point‑of‑sale disclosures and handle customer inquiries or returns tied to repairability or warranty questions, adding operational friction.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill pits consumer and environmental gains from broad, affordable access to parts and repair information against manufacturers’ legitimate claims to safeguard intellectual property, ensure product safety and protect cybersecurity; resolving that trade‑off requires detailed regulatory choices about duration, scope and narrowly tailored exceptions, and there is no single answer that eliminates the risk to either side.
The bill advances repair access while leaving crucial standards undefined. Phrases such as "reasonable period," "reasonable price" and the prohibition on measures that "unreasonably" prevent repair require regulatory definition or judicial interpretation; those choices will materially shape how far the law reaches across product categories and the duration of manufacturers’ obligations.
The broad definition of repair information that includes software and security codes raises intellectual property and cybersecurity concerns — releasing authentication codes or diagnostic interfaces can enable independent repair but might also create exploit vectors if not carefully scoped.
The Act balances that risk by allowing regulations to exclude measures justified by safety, privacy or cybersecurity, but the statutory text does not prescribe how to weigh these competing interests. Enforcement and dispute resolution are delegated heavily to regulations (including the process for purchasers to demand repairs under Section 26E), which means the real-world effects depend on the government’s regulatory design and resource allocation.
Finally, the warranty carve‑outs shift many disputes into technical causation: manufacturers can still refuse coverage when they prove improper repair caused the damage, which will likely increase litigation or administrative hearings over fault and proof standards.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.