Contractual dissolution requirements not observed? No legal dissolution of the franchise agreement – dated July 23, 2020 – mr. C. Damen
Can a franchisor terminate the franchise agreement if it has failed to comply with its own contractual requirements? The Court of First Instance recently ruled that there was no legally valid dissolution of the franchise agreement as a result of this.
After a successful period of cooperation between franchisor and franchisee, cracks have appeared in the relationship between the parties. The franchisee plans to take over a business that the franchisor believes violates a contractually agreed non-competition clause. The franchisor then terminates the franchise agreement and terminates the formula with respect to the franchisee. Subsequently, the franchisee terminates the franchise agreement because the franchisor allegedly failed. Both parties state that they have dissolved the franchise agreement on good grounds and are claiming damages from each other. Who is now right in court and why?
The judge does not follow the vision of the franchisor. In complying with the franchise agreement, the franchisor itself would have failed to comply with a number of contractual agreements. These agreements relate to the continuation of the form of cooperation, the development of the formula and the promotion of joint growth. In the present case, the franchise agreement contains an obligation for the franchisor
to inform the franchisee by registered letter of the measures to be taken to bring the operation back into line with the franchise agreement. However, the court is of the opinion that the franchisor wrongly failed to observe this provision when dissolving the franchise agreement. Because the franchisor has not observed its own rules on dissolution, the dissolution is invalid and the franchisor wrongly stopped complying with the franchise agreement.
The franchisor is ordered to pay compensation to the franchisee as a result of the non-legally valid extrajudicial dissolution of the franchise agreement.
It strongly depends on the circumstances whether and how a franchise agreement can be legally dissolved and what requirements apply. In this ruling, however, it has been confirmed once again that what the parties have agreed with each other (in the agreement) is leading in any case.
mr. C. Damen – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice.
Do you want to respond? Go to damen@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Bankrupt because the franchisor refused to sell the franchise company – dated January 28, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The District Court of The Hague has dealt with a request from a franchisor to declare a franchisee bankrupt.
Prescribed shop fitting – dated January 28, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Midden-Nederland District Court has ruled on whether a franchisee is obliged to carry the shop fittings prescribed by the franchisor.
Ludwig & Van Dam attorneys summon Sandd and PostNL on behalf of the Sandd franchisees – dated 9 January 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Association of Franchisees of Sandd (VFS) has today summoned Sandd and PostNL before the court in Arnhem. The VFS believes that Sandd and PostNL are letting the franchisees down hard.
Article The National Franchise Guide: “Why joint and several liability, for example, next to private?” – dated 7 January 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
Franchisees are often asked to co-sign the franchise agreement in addition to their franchise, for example. Sometimes franchisees refuse to do so and the franchise agreement is not signed.
Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten assists Sandd franchisees: Franchisees Sandd challenge postal monopoly in court – dated 12 November 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Association of Franchisees of Sandd (VFS) is challenging the decision of State Secretary Mona Keijzer to approve the postal merger between PostNL and Sandd before the court in Rotterdam.
Franchisee trapped by non-compete clause? – dated October 21, 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
The District Court of East Brabant has ruled that a franchisee was still bound by the non-competition clause in the event of premature termination of the franchise agreement.