Bankrupt because the franchisor refused to sell the franchise company – dated January 28, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin

By Published On: 28-01-2020Categories: Statements & current affairs

The District Court of The Hague 19 November 2019, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2019:12288 (KFC)
handled a request from a franchisor for a franchisee
to declare bankruptcy. However, the franchisee indicates that the
franchise company could have been or would have been sold, but the
franchisor has opposed this.

The franchise agreement stipulates that in the event of an intended sale of
any interest in the franchise business, the franchisee to the
franchisor would submit the draft purchase agreement. Furthermore, it is the
franchisee prohibited from selling the franchise without the
the franchisor’s prior written approval.

The franchisee has put forward a prospective buyer on two occasions
to have found, but that the franchisor will not allow the sale of the
franchise company by refusing its permission. The
In this context, the franchisor has undisputedly argued that it has never
draft purchase agreement, for what reason it
prospective buyers has not been approved.

The franchisor has indicated its preference for a
other, third party prospective purchaser. The franchisee has indicated the by
to accept this third party offered prize. In this way the
claim can still be paid and become a bankruptcy
turned away. However, during the subsequent oral hearing
revealed that this third party has withdrawn.

Under these circumstances, according to the court, it cannot be
concluded that filing for bankruptcy by standards of
reasonableness and fairness is unacceptable. The importance of the
franchisor that its claim is paid. That is her interest
given a bankruptcy, now a bankruptcy will lead to it too
monetize the assets of the franchisee’s business with
for the purpose of paying the creditors (to the extent and as much as possible). A
further delay of payment is not justified by the interests of
defendant, now that there is no prospect of a private sale of the
assets of the franchise company out of bankruptcy within a short
term.

It is not inconceivable that a franchisor with refusing a
prospective buyer achieves that the franchisee can no longer meet his debts
to fulfil. If a franchisee believes that this right of approval from the
franchisor is abused, for example in a bankruptcy
get a new franchisee (who has had to pay less as a purchase price
payment), then it is difficult to prove.

mr. AW Dolphijn – franchise lawyer

Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Want
you respond?

Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl

Other messages

Post non-competition ban on services and sales franchise

When a franchise agreement ends, many franchisees encounter a prohibition in the franchise agreement to perform similar work for a period of time thereafter

The concept of the Franchise Act: impact for franchisors and franchisees – dated February 5, 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin

Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten believes that if the draft of the Franchise Act actually becomes law, a lot will change for franchisors and franchisees.

Buy franchise business and the laid off sick employee from 7 years ago

The question is whether a Bruna franchisee, when selling the franchise company to Bruna, should have stated that seven years ago an employee had left employment sick.

Court prohibits Domino’s unilateral area reduction when extending franchise agreements – dated January 28, 2019 – mr. RCWL Albers

On January 9, 2019, the District Court of Rotterdam rendered a judgment in a lawsuit initiated by the Association of Domino's Pizza Franchisees and all its members (almost all Domino's franchisees).

By Remy Albers|28-01-2019|Categories: Dispute settlement, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , |

Lien of the franchisee

Can a prospective franchisee invoke a right of retention to reclaim an entry fee if a franchise agreement is not concluded after the pre-agreement has been concluded?

Go to Top