Article De Nationale Franchise Gids: “Information obligations of the intended franchisee under the Franchise Act” – dated August 7, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
Although the purpose of the Franchise Act is to protect franchisees
against franchisors, there are also some obligations for it
franchisees determined. Especially with regard to the phase prior to
a number of conditions apply to the conclusion of the franchise agreement
explicit legal rules pertaining to the intended franchisee.
The intended franchisee must, before closing the
franchise agreement, to the franchisor timely information about its
to disclose its own financial position, insofar as this is reasonable
importance. After all, the exploitation of the franchise formula requires both
commencement and during the franchise relationship investments on the part of the
franchisee. In the pre-contractual phase, the franchisee will therefore
must make information available to the franchisor
gives the (to be obtained) financial scope and coverage for such
able to make investments.
The Prospective Franchisee shall continue to serve, within the bounds of reasonableness
and fairness, to take the necessary measures to prevent him
proceeds to close under the influence of incorrect assumptions
of the franchise agreement. The intended franchisee therefore serves a certain
to conduct research. In any case, this can be counted on
properly reviewing the information received from the franchisor,
if necessary, calling in expert assistance in a timely manner and, if necessary, the
making inquiries with other franchisees within the chain about their
experiences with the exploitation of the relevant franchise formula.
In retrospect, if a (prospective) franchisee does not, franchisors,
have not been properly or not fully informed, then the law can
franchise affect the validity of the franchise agreement. Also
could a franchisee be liable for damages on the basis of the act
against the law.
mr. AW Dolphijn – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Want
you respond? Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Ludwig & Van Dam attorneys summon Sandd and PostNL on behalf of the Sandd franchisees – dated 9 January 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Association of Franchisees of Sandd (VFS) has today summoned Sandd and PostNL before the court in Arnhem. The VFS believes that Sandd and PostNL are letting the franchisees down hard.
Article The National Franchise Guide: “Why joint and several liability, for example, next to private?” – dated 7 January 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
Franchisees are often asked to co-sign the franchise agreement in addition to their franchise, for example. Sometimes franchisees refuse to do so and the franchise agreement is not signed.
Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten assists Sandd franchisees: Franchisees Sandd challenge postal monopoly in court – dated 12 November 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Association of Franchisees of Sandd (VFS) is challenging the decision of State Secretary Mona Keijzer to approve the postal merger between PostNL and Sandd before the court in Rotterdam.
Franchisee trapped by non-compete clause? – dated October 21, 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
The District Court of East Brabant has ruled that a franchisee was still bound by the non-competition clause in the event of premature termination of the franchise agreement.
Supermarket letter – 26
Supermarket Newsletter No. 26
Link franchise agreement and rental agreement uncertain? – dated October 14, 2019 – mr K. Bastiaans
It is no exception within a franchise relationship that the parties agree that the franchise agreement and the rental agreement are inextricably linked.