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

Interview Franchise+ – mrs. J. Sterk and AW Dolphijn – “Reversal burden of proof in forecasts honored by court”

The new Acquisition Fraud Act indeed appears to be relevant for the franchise industry, according to this article from Franchise+.

By Ludwig en van Dam|20-12-2017|Categories: Dispute settlement, Forecasting issues, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , , |

Franchisor convicted under the Acquisition Fraud Act

For the first time, a court has ruled, with reference to the Acquisition Fraud Act, that if a franchisee claims that the franchisor has presented an unsatisfactory prognosis

Agreements Related to the Franchise Agreement

On 31 October 2017, the Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal issued similar judgments for nineteen franchisees (ECLI:NL:GHARL:2017:9453 through ECLI:NL:GHARL:2017:9472).

Column Franchise+ – mr. J. Sterk – “Franchisee does body check better than franchise check”

A gym embarks on a franchise concept that offers “Body Checks” and discounts to (potential) members in collaboration with health insurers.

Seminar Mrs. J. Sterk and M. Munnik – Thursday, November 2, 2017: “Important legal developments for franchisors”

Attorneys Jeroen Sterk and Maaike Munnik of Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten will update you on the status of and developments surrounding the Dutch Franchise Code and the Acquisition Fraude Act.

By Jeroen Sterk|02-11-2017|Categories: Forecasting issues, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , |
Go to Top