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
Which court for a rental and franchise agreement?
Which court is competent to rule on a related rental and franchise agreement?
Interview Franchise+ – mrs. J. Sterk and AW Dolphijn – “Reversal burden of proof in forecasts honored by court”
The new Acquisition Fraud Act indeed appears to be relevant for the franchise industry, according to this article from Franchise+.
Franchisor convicted under the Acquisition Fraud Act
For the first time, a court has ruled, with reference to the Acquisition Fraud Act, that if a franchisee claims that the franchisor has presented an unsatisfactory prognosis
Agreements Related to the Franchise Agreement
On 31 October 2017, the Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal issued similar judgments for nineteen franchisees (ECLI:NL:GHARL:2017:9453 through ECLI:NL:GHARL:2017:9472).
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.