Abuse of bankruptcy law
The right must be used for the purpose for which it was written. The purpose of bankruptcy law is to prevent people or companies from continuing to accrue debt that they cannot pay off.
Bankruptcy law is often used by a franchisor as a means of pressure to induce the franchisee to pay promptly. If payment is not made on time, the franchisor immediately threatens to file for the bankruptcy of the franchisee. No room is left for a possible counterclaim or to contest the claim.
In short, the bankruptcy law indicates that bankruptcy can be declared when there are several creditors and the debtor is in a state in which he has ceased to pay. The requirement that there must be more than one creditor will often be met when a franchisor claims to have a claim against a franchisee. As a creditor, for example, the current account credit already counts. However, the fact that there are several creditors is not a sufficient condition to be declared bankrupt. In addition, there must also be a situation in which payment has ceased.
When a franchisee leaves an invoice unpaid and the franchisee has a reason for this, it is therefore advisable to properly communicate and record the reason for non-payment. If the franchisee does not pay for a reason, he is not in the situation that he has ceased to pay, so the reason must be known. In this way, the franchisee avoids being wrongly put under pressure to file for bankruptcy or, more annoyingly, that, after the franchisor has already filed for bankruptcy, the situation has to be explained to the court, where there is actually a discussion about the amount of the invoice or the quality of the service or goods provided.
Ludwig & Van Dam franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice
![](https://ludwigvandam.megaconcept.nl/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/232court-min-400x222.jpg)
Other messages
Newsletter – The National Franchise Guide: Hospitality sector: new times, new franchise formulas?
According to data published in March 2015 by Statistics Netherlands in the Horeca Quarterly Monitor
Continue to serve (existing) customers after termination of the franchise relationship
Continue to serve (existing) customers after termination of the franchise relationship
Franchisee appeals in vain to incorrect prognosis
Franchisee appeals in vain to incorrect prognosis
Economic headwinds and duty of care: sometimes a difficult relationship
The trade press, as well as the more general media, are full of it: the retail trade is under heavy pressure
Gathering evidence for faulty prognosis
Gathering evidence for faulty prognosis
Exclusion nullification in unsigned franchise contract
On 17 February 2015, the Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal assessed a court judgment.