Duty of care franchisor in the pre-contractual phase
The District Court of Limburg ruled on 6 April 2017, ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2016:2843, that the franchisor has a duty of care towards the prospective franchisee in the pre-contractual phase. This means that the franchisor is also obliged in the pre-contractual phase to provide assistance and advice to a prospective franchisee. The Court of Appeal of ‘s-Hertogenbosch upheld the judgment on 17 April 2018, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2018:1607.
The prospective franchisee had entered into a confidentiality agreement with a franchisor. This includes, among other things, that the aspiring franchisee will keep all information that comes to his knowledge in this context confidential from third parties and that the information provided will not be used in such a way that the interests of other parties involved will be harmed.
Subsequently, the prospective franchisee was provided with an operating forecast showing that the gross margins in the first 3 years amounted to between 27% and 29%. Inquiries with the Franchise Council show that the average margins of other franchisees over the previous 3 years are between 23.3% and 26.9%.
The aspiring franchisee breaks off negotiations at the last minute to enter into a franchise agreement and then contracts with a competing franchisor organization. This abort took place as a result of the fact that the gross margins of other franchisees of this franchisor turned out to be lower than had initially been predicted by the franchisor to the prospective franchisee.
According to the Court of Appeal, the backgrounds of the parties also play a (limited) role and the franchisor’s vision is also not followed in the position that the prospective franchisee should not have broken off the negotiations. Although the parties had jointly found a suitable building to exploit the franchise company, the prospective franchisee did not act unlawfully by going into business with a competing franchisor organization after the negotiations had broken off.
This ruling shows that, particularly in situations where a prospective franchisee will find himself in a dependent position, the franchisor must ensure that it provides the necessary assistance and advice. With the conclusion of a letter of intent or preliminary agreement, other than just a non-disclosure agreement, the duty of care can be regulated in the negotiation process, which is recommended.
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
Column Franchise + – mr. Th.R. Ludwig: “Towards strict liability”
The Supreme Court recently ruled in a prognosis issue.
Article in Entrance: “Rentals”
“The landlord increased the prices of the property every year, but he hasn't done this for 2 years, maybe he forgets. Can he still claim an overdue amount later?”
No valid appeal to non-compete clause in franchising
On 28 February 2017, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2017:1469, the provisional relief judge of the District Court of Gelderland ruled on whether a franchisee could be bound by a non-compete clause.
Structurally unsound revenue forecasts from the franchisor
On 15 March 2017, the District Court of Limburg ruled in eight similar judgments (including ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2017:2344) on the franchise agreements of various franchisees of the P3 franchise formula.
Franchisee obliged to cooperate with formula change?
On 24 March 2017, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2017:1860, the preliminary relief judge of the Amsterdam District Court once again considered the issue in which Intertoys wishes to convert Bart Smit's stores
Delivery stop by franchisor not allowed
On 9 February 2017, the preliminary relief judge of the District Court of Gelderland, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2017:1372, ruled that a franchisor had not fulfilled its obligation to supply the franchisee