Franchise agreement/sublease agreement link
Court of Dordrecht, subdistrict sector
Franchise agreements and sublease agreements must be adequately linked. After all, the sublease agreement is governed by mandatory tenancy law. This cannot simply be deviated from. An adequate link takes place by means of a subdistrict court request, to be made when the franchise agreement and sublease agreement are signed. Subsequently, the subdistrict court may approve deviations from the mandatory tenancy provisions, for example with regard to the term of the sublease agreement and the moment of termination. With an adequate link, the franchise agreement and sublease agreement are equal in terms of term and termination.
A case has recently been submitted to the subdistrict sector of the court. The franchisor invoked deviating rental clauses that had not been approved in advance by the subdistrict court judge. The subdistrict court concluded that there is no mixed agreement, but two separate agreements. As a result, the franchisee was able to successfully invoke the sublease agreement, even though the franchise agreement had been terminated. Despite the termination of the franchise agreement, the franchisor, as a sub-lessor, should have taken into account the interests of the sub-tenant/franchisee. The subtenant/franchisee suffered damage as a result, for which the franchisor/sublessor was liable, according to the court in Dordrecht. The former franchisee obtained a strong position through this construction.
If the franchisor and franchisee wish to enter into a mixed agreement, they must always request an adequate connection to the subdistrict court. Simultaneous termination is possible in this way.
Mr Th.R. Ludwig – Franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice Would you like to respond? Mail to ludwig@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.