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
Column Franchise+ – mr. J. Sterk – “Franchisee does body check better than franchise check”
A gym embarks on a franchise concept that offers “Body Checks” and discounts to (potential) members in collaboration with health insurers.
Seminar Mrs. J. Sterk and M. Munnik – Thursday, November 2, 2017: “Important legal developments for franchisors”
Attorneys Jeroen Sterk and Maaike Munnik of Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten will update you on the status of and developments surrounding the Dutch Franchise Code and the Acquisition Fraude Act.
Goodwill at end of franchise agreement
In a case before the Amsterdam Court of Appeal on 26 September 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:3900 (Seal & Go), a franchisee claimed compensation for goodwill (ex Article 7:308 of the Dutch Civil Code) after the
Article in Entrance: “Resignation”
Fire an employee who is not performing well? The subdistrict court is strict. If you, as an employer, cannot demonstrate that you have done everything yourself to make the person function better, it will be
Cost price that is too high as a hidden franchise fee
An interlocutory judgment of the District Court of The Hague dated 30 August 2017, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2017:10597 (Happy Nurse) shows that the court has considered the question whether the
Supermarket letter – 19
Coop liability for damages due to non-performance towards the franchisee