Advisory Board on Regulatory Pressure (ATR) advises State Secretary Keijzer about the Franchise Act
The ATR recommends submitting the bill only after a number of points of advice have been taken into account. The advice is particularly worth reading and can be consulted via the link: https://www.atr-regeldruk.nl/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/30-U010-Ministerie-van-EZK-Wet-franchise-wgpdf
In short, it is first advised to actively inform franchisors and franchisees about this amendment to the law. Now that the consultation that has now closed shows that it has passed a large part of the industry, this seems to be extremely useful advice. It is also recommended to monitor the effectiveness of the law and to include an evaluation provision in the law. Now that the franchise agreement will move from an unnamed to a named agreement, this also seems like a welcome addition to the bill. The ATR also calls attention to the transitional period. In addition, the ATR asks for more clarification and definitions to be included in the bill for concepts that have not yet been further defined, such as “good franchisor and franchiseeship” “considerable consequences” etc. The ATR also recommends actively communicating goodwill calculation best practices so that parties know where they stand before concluding the franchise agreement. Finally, the ATR recommends including examples of what is meant by “conditions customary in trade”.
In short, the ATR is of the opinion that parts of the proposed legislation are not yet sufficiently concrete and known to have the desired effect in legal practice, or preventively, namely a more balanced franchise sector. We are particularly curious to what extent the Ministry takes into account the advice of the ATR.
mr. J. Strong – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Do you want to respond? Go to strong@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Alex Dolphijn in the Financial Dagblad about the judgment of the Supreme Court regarding Street-One
Franchisors more liable for incorrect forecasts Franchisees can now more easily hold their parent organization liable for incorrect profit and turnover forecasts.
Supermarket letter – 17
Supreme Court: More quickly liable for forecasts
Article in Entrance: “Small print”
“When I do business with a supplier, I never read the fine print. Recently I noticed that there are all kinds of things in it that I actually do not agree with.
Column Franchise+ – mr. Th.R. Ludwig: “Delivery stop by franchisor again not allowed”
Once again, the president in preliminary relief proceedings ruled on the question whether a franchisor's supply stop against the franchisee was permitted, with the franchisee paying a substantial
The manager (employee) who becomes a franchisee – fictitious employment?
On 14 December 2016, the subdistrict court judge of the District Court of Noord-Holland, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2016:11031 (Employee/Espresso Lounge), considered the situation in which an employee
The Supreme Court sets strict requirements for franchise forecasts
A ruling by the Supreme Court on Friday casts a new light on the provision of profit and turnover forecasts to aspiring franchisees.