The last period shows that discussions regarding goodwill payments at the end of a franchise partnership are still numerous. These discussions usually boil down to a franchisee’s opinion that his franchisor should pay him a goodwill amount for the customer base built up by that franchisee during the term of the franchise agreement. This discussion occurs in particular in situations where either the operation of the franchise establishment in question is completely discontinued or the franchisor takes over the establishment. This discussion is less common when the franchisee, within the rules of the franchise agreement, transfers his business to a successive franchisee, because in those cases a market-based acquisition price is often paid.

In the other two situations, however, the discussion does take place, whereby the franchisee concerned is undoubtedly inspired by the legal provisions regarding agency. Without wanting to go into detail here, it should be noted that it does include a goodwill arrangement at the end of the agreement. However, such a regulation does not exist in franchising relationships. Therefore, unless otherwise agreed between the parties, a franchisor is not obliged to make any goodwill payment to a departing franchisee on the basis of the franchise agreement as such. If that does happen, then this is solely the result of negotiations between the parties and the payment, where appropriate, of a price in line with the market. Goodwill, it must be repeated, is pre-eminently a subject that is subject to market forces and, unless otherwise agreed in principle, is at the discretion of the entrepreneurs involved.

Ludwig & Van Dam franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice

Other messages

Incorrect prognosis due to lack of location research

The District Court of The Hague ruled on 21 March 2018, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2018:3348, that a franchisor's forecast was unsound, as a result of which the franchisee had erred and the franchisor

Column Franchise+ – “Disputes about franchise fees”

Lately, it has also hit the biggest franchise organizations in the Netherlands. At the formulas of Albert Heijn, Hema, Etos, Bruna and Olympia, for example, there was and will be a lot

By Alex Dolphijn|09-04-2018|Categories: Dispute settlement, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , |

Column Franchise+ – “Flashing quarrels about franchise fee must stop”

Lately, it has also hit the biggest franchise organizations in the Netherlands. At the formulas of Albert Heijn, HEMA, Etos, Bruna and Olympia, for example, there was and will be a lot

By Alex Dolphijn|09-04-2018|Categories: Dispute settlement, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , |

Circumvent post non-compete clause in franchising

On 3 April 2018, the Court of Appeal of Arnhem-Leeuwarden, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2018:3128, overturned an interim injunction of the District Court of Gelderland on competitive activities.

Column Franchise+ – “Prohibition of sales via internet platforms in franchise agreement exempt from cartel prohibition”

At the end of last year, Thuisbezorgd.nl incurred the wrath of many meal delivery companies by announcing another rate increase. The standard rate of Thuisbezorgd.nl thus reached a

By Remy Albers|09-04-2018|Categories: Competition, Statements & current affairs|Tags: |
Go to Top