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
Infringement of exclusive service area by franchisor in connection with formula change dated February 27, 2017
On 30 January 2017, the provisional relief judge of the District Court of Noord-Holland, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2017:688 (Intertoys/franchisee), was asked how to deal with the
Forecasts at startup franchise formula
The Amsterdam Court of Appeal ruled on 14 February 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:455 (Tot Straks/franchisee) on the question whether the franchisor had provided an unsatisfactory prognosis and whether the
Mandatory transfer of franchise business to franchisor?
On January 23, 2017, the District Court of Amsterdam, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2017:412 (CoffeeCompany/Dam Spirit BV) rendered a judgment on the question whether a franchisee upon termination of the cooperation
Transfer customer data to franchisor
In its judgment of 10 January 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:68 (OnlineAccountants.nl), the Amsterdam Court ruled, among other things, on the question of how customer data should be transferred.
Franchise Closing Sale – Who Gets the Sale Proceeds?
The judgment of the District Court of the Northern Netherlands dated 12 October 2016, ECLI:NL:RBNNE:2016:5061 (Administrator/Expert Group and Rabobank), focused on the question whether the franchisor, together with the bank,
Column Franchise+ – mr. Th.R. Ludwig: “Judge: franchisor’s duty of care comparable to that of a bank”
Various judgments in 2016 made it clear how high the standard of care for a franchisor towards its franchisees is.