Delivery stop by franchisor not allowed
On 9 February 2017, the provisional relief judge of the District Court of Gelderland, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2017:1372, ruled that a franchisor was not allowed to suddenly stop its obligation to supply the franchisee, despite the fact that the franchisee was in substantial payment arrears.
The franchisee had significantly reduced the payment arrears. For several years the franchisor had granted a substantial supplier credit for the remainder. It has not been established that the franchisor indicated at any time that the payment arrears were unacceptable to it as franchisor and that it had to be reduced to a certain amount within a certain period, or that it had to be repaid in full. The franchisor was therefore not free to suddenly take the position not to supply the franchisee anymore and to claim the full outstanding amount at once, without observing a term.
Another thing is that the granting of the supplier credit does not automatically entail the obligation to allow and continue to allow a further increase. The franchisor was therefore (well) free to supply the franchisee against payment in advance.
Franchisors cannot simply assume that they can always put the franchisee in jeopardy if the franchisee has payment arrears
mr. AW Dolphijn – Franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice.
Do you want to respond? Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl .
Other messages
HEMA sentenced to suspend e-commerce contribution to franchisees
HEMA is in conflict with its franchisees about the contribution to e-commerce costs. HEMA believes that the existing scheme from 1997 is outdated.
Error or deception in the conclusion of the franchise agreement
A franchisee who regrets after entering into a franchise agreement may believe that before or at the conclusion of the franchise agreement by the franchisor ...
Supermarket letter – 21
Judge: Protect franchisee against supermarket organization (Coop) as lessor
The supplier prescribed by the franchisor is not performing? What now?
The Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch ruled on 20 February 2018, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2018:727, on the question of who must prove that the franchisee was misled when entering into the
Judge: Protect franchisee against supermarket organization (Coop) as lessor
Does the franchisee need legal protection from supermarket franchisor Coop? The District Court of Rotterdam ruled on 9 February 2018, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2018:1151, that this is the case.
Acquisition fraud vs. error in franchise forecasting
Who has to prove that the franchisor's forecast is unsound? In principle, this is the franchisee. If the franchisee invokes the Acquisition Fraud Act, it may be that