Court rules that corona crisis does not constitute force majeure – dated April 10, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin

By Published On: 10-04-2020Categories: Statements & current affairs

If payment cannot be made due to the loss of income, then
there is not always a force majeure situation. The Court of Den Bosch 23
March 2020 (ECLI:NL:RBOBR:2020:1763) ruled that a tenant cannot appeal
to force majeure because of the corona crisis, because from the
commencement of the lease and therefore before the corona crisis
late payment of rent. The backlog was possible with the corona crisis
not be logged in. The lessor claimed the entire arrears,
plus fines for late payment. The court held as follows:

“As far as[gedaagden] intended to appeal with their defence
financial inability or inability to pay, the inability to pay,
no matter how annoying[gedaagden] , in the risk sphere of[gedaagden] is
and not release them from their payment obligations under the
lease agreement[eisers] dismisses. The subdistrict court judge signs this
indicates that it is already too late from the start of the rental agreement
payments through[gedaagden] , while there was no corona at that time
crisis.”

The court rules that the claimed entire rent arrears and fine
will have to be paid.

Perhaps the judgment would have been different if there had been no question at all
was from a late payment prior to the corona crisis and the
payment arrears are wholly and exclusively attributable to the
corona crisis.

 

mr. AW Dolphijn – franchise lawyer

Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Want
you respond? Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl

Other messages

Damage estimate after wrongful termination of the franchise agreement by the franchisor

In a judgment of the Supreme Court of 15 September 2017, ECLI:NL:HR:2017:2372 (Franchisee/Coop), it was discussed that supermarket organization Coop had not complied with agreements, as a result of which the franchisee

Franchisor is obliged to extend the franchise agreement

On 6 September 2017, the Rotterdam District Court ruled, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2017:6975 (Misty / Bram Ladage), that the refusal to extend a franchise agreement by a franchisor

The (in)validity of a post-contractual non-competition clause in a franchise agreement: analogy with employment law?

On 5 September 2017, the District Court of Gelderland, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2017:4565, rendered a judgment on, among other things, the question of whether Bruna, as a franchisor, could invoke the prohibition for a

Column Franchise+ – mr. J Sterk: “Court orders fast food chain to extend franchise agreement

The case is set to begin this year. For years, the franchisee has been refusing to sign the new franchise agreement that was offered with renewal, as it would lead to a deterioration of his legal position

By Jeroen Sterk|01-09-2017|Categories: Dispute settlement, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , |

Not a valid non-compete clause for franchisee

On 18 November 2016, the interim relief judge of the Central Netherlands District Court, ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2016:7754, rendered a judgment in the issue concerning whether the franchisee was held

Franchise & Law No. 5 – Acquisition Fraud and Franchising Act

The Acquisition Fraud Act came into effect on 1 July 2016. This includes amendments to Section 6:194 of the Dutch Civil Code.

By Ludwig en van Dam|10-08-2017|Categories: Dispute settlement, Forecasting issues, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , , |
Go to Top