it won't. ac will out litigate these amateurs. not that they will have to; i'm betting summary judgement granted for ac after first motion.
surely there's some canadian case law from 1940 when a bunch of people went to the saan wanting their rca 630 tv for $5 as advertised in the newspaper, only to sue after the firm said that was a misprint, it's actually $55
If I'm not mistaken, the mistake in print was the newspaper's... and there was no consideration exchanged.
AC induced these plaintiffs to lend money to AC for the duration of the mistake. Also the wording in the article is that the contract breach was discovered at time of attempting to use the FP. Not only was no notice of revocation given (assumption), but the plaintiffs now had to find alternative carriage possibly at a time when fares had risen. Reliance is understood in contract law.
Lastly, this was not a newspaper ad. This was "printed" by AC on AC media, and sold with confirmed transaction of consideration on AC systems.
For the silly TV case, if the plaintiffs had a smart lawyer, they could claim their time and gas money as losses... I dunno, 5 cents back in 1940? And who's at fault? Newspaper? The communication system between retailer and newspaper? Or actual retailer?
These ambiguities do not exist in this AC case.