Court rules that corona crisis does not constitute force majeure – dated April 10, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
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
Does a franchisee have to accept a new model franchise agreement?
On 31 March 2017, the District Court of Rotterdam, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2017:2457, ruled in interlocutory proceedings on the question whether franchisor Bram Ladage had complied with the franchise agreement with its franchisee.
Mandatory (market-based) purchase prices for franchisees
To what extent can a franchisor change agreements about the (market) purchase prices of the goods that the franchisees are obliged to purchase?
Director’s liability of a franchisee after failing to rely on an unsound prognosis.
On 11 July 2017, the Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch made a decision on whether the franchisor could successfully sue the director of a BV for non-compliance with the
Liability accountant for prepared prognosis?
In a judgment of the Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch of 11 July 2017, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2017:3153, it was discussed that franchisees accused the franchisor's accountant of being liable
How far does the bank’s duty of care extend?
Some time ago the question was raised in case law what the position of the bank is in the triangular relationship franchisor – bank – franchisee.
Burden of proof reversal in forecasting as misleading advertising?
In an interlocutory judgment of 15 June 2017, the District Court of Zeeland-West-Brabant, ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2017:3833, ruled on a claim for (among other things) suspension of the non-compete clause.