Article The National Franchise Guide – “Corona discount on rent” – dated June 2, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
If a rental property is obliged to be closed due to corona, this may be the case
are entitled to a rent reduction, according to the court
North Netherlands.
On 27 May 2020, the District Court of the Northern Netherlands ruled that the tenant
rightly stated that closure of the leased property as a result of a
government measure may be a defect in the rented property. The tenant can
after all, not use what he rented. The law stipulates that
a defect that the tenant can in principle claim (with retroactive effect).
make a rent reduction.
The matter in question related to a situation where InBev was a tenant of
a real estate investor, and InBev sublet to a hospitality entrepreneur.
Such constructions of hiring in and out are also included
franchising relationships. InBev had offered two-thirds
of the rent for April and May, after which the catering entrepreneur
(the subtenant) the remainder of one third of these months
pay to the real estate investor. The real estate investor did not want this and
demanded full and timely rent payment in interlocutory proceedings. The court
considers that InBev rightly states that closure of the leased property is a consequence
of a government measure if a defect in the rented property is visible. Mead
given the unforeseeable circumstances, is entitled to
rent reduction. The claim for payment of the
full rent is therefore rejected. Depending on the specific
circumstances and the content of the rental agreements are also possible
Of course, other outcomes are conceivable.
Both the franchisor and the franchisee do well together
to take action against the main lessor, such as the brewery and
hospitality entrepreneur also successfully did so in this matter. Together
can they enter into consultation with the main lessor for a reasonable
to find a solution.
mr. AW Dolphijn – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Want
do you want to respond? Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
The benchmark for franchise forecasts – dated 29 May 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
On 19 March 2019, the Den Bosch Court of Appeal, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2019:1037, listed the case law of the Supreme Court on prognosis in franchising.
Franchise arbitration: too high a threshold? – mr. M. Munnik
When entering into an agreement, it is possible for the parties - contrary to the law - to designate a competent court. This also applies to the franchise agreement. Of this possibility
Franchise appeal for error due to incorrect forecasts and lack of support rejected – dated April 25, 2019 – mr. K. Bastian
The Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch ruled (ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2019:697) on the question whether the mere fact that forecasts did not materialize justifies the conclusion that the franchisee has been shortchanged...
Article De Nationale Franchise Gids: “Increasing protection against recruiting franchisees” – dated 2 April 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
It is becoming increasingly apparent that recruited franchisees can be protected on the basis of the Acquisition Fraud Act.
The Franchise Association and Franchise Binding – Contracting 2019, No. 1
A contribution on common provisions in franchise agreements that require a franchisee to be a member of a franchisee's association.
Deception in recruiting a franchisee?
A ruling on whether the franchisor had made a misrepresentation when recruiting a franchisee.