Article Franchise+: “With our franchise formula you will earn mountains of gold.” dated 10 July 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
For example, the Amsterdam District Court ruled that a franchisor merely praised the franchise formula in general terms by stating that a certain average turnover is achieved by the franchisees. The fact that this average turnover is not achieved by a particular franchisee does not mean that the franchisor should not have made the announcement. Also, in another case, it was held that there were only general promotions with the statement that the franchise formula was “the best price level!” and is able “to achieve this best price level because you benefit from international purchasing advantage because you buy from the source.”
Promotions are not always permissible. After all, advertising can go further than an endorsement and may contain information, such as omissions, that is misleading are. It will not always be obvious when there are generalized praise and the provision or withholding of inadmissible information. information on the acquisition of franchisees by franchisors. The legislator has provided more clarity about the impermissible with the introduction of the Acquisition Fraud Act. Under acquisition fraud be deceptive commercial practices involving the use of certain sales techniques aimed at gaining trust and arousing expectations in order to induce the other to enter into an agreement, whereby the consideration is not or hardly properly provided. The law Acquisition fraud explicitly refers to misleading statements such as ten regarding “statistical data”. It is also worth considering in this context historical data or forecasts. Of commendation in general terms will then not soon. With franchising in particular, the franchise formula will be promoted by the franchisor with historical data or forecasts. The the question then is whether that commendation takes place in “general terms”. The distinction between permissible promotions and misleading information remains a gray area, despite the relevant legislation. Each individual case will always have to be judged on its own.
Click here for the entire article.
mr. AW Dolphijn – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice.
Do you want to respond? Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
No non-compete violation by franchisee – mr. AW Dolphijn – dated February 4, 2021
On 20 January 2021, the District Court of Rotterdam, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2021:657, ...
(Partially) similar activities not in conflict with non-compete clause – mr. RCWL Albers – dated February 4, 2021
In recent proceedings, two (former) franchisees were sued by their ...
Court issues groundbreaking verdict: Rent reduction in substantive proceedings for catering operators as a result of the lockdown – mr. C. Damen – dated February 1, 2021
Last Wednesday, a controversial ruling was made and published for ...
Article Franchise+ -The risks of a minimum turnover requirement in the franchise agreement for the franchisor
Including a minimum turnover to be achieved in the franchise ...
Article The National Franchise Guide: “Minimum turnover as a forecast”
For many years now, the responsibility and liability of the ...
Article Franchise+ – “Franchise statistics 2019: decline trend continues, caused by the Franchise Act?”- mr. J. Sterk, mr. M. Munnik and mr. JAJ Devilee
Since 2007, Ludwig & Van Dam attorneys have been periodically ...