Goodwill Transfer: Include Google Business Profile?
What is transferred goodwill? This question can be very relevant in franchise relationships where goodwill is important (Section 7:921 of the Dutch Civil Code). Does Goodwill Transfer include a Google Business Profile? On 21 June 2022, the District Court of Rotterdam, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2022:5363, made an important ruling in that context.
The issue was that since the start in 2005, a nationwide franchise organization had been built up from one restaurant in Rotterdam. As a result, the brand name has gained enormous fame.
In 2018, a certain restaurant of that chain was sold. The buyer does not become a franchisee. The brand name of the restaurant is not transferred to the buyer and remains with the seller. The buyer has also started the rebranding and this will be completed in mid-April 2021.
A Google business profile has been created by the seller in the past for the restaurant. The brand name of the franchise chain is central to this. A Google company profile is a tool that companies can use to increase their online findability via Google.
Due to the restaurant rebranding, the restaurateur has changed the content of the Google business profile. He then found that he was only registered as an administrator. As it turned out, the main owner was (still) the party that had sold the restaurant at the time.
The seller is required to change the Google Business Profile and register the buyer as the primary owner of the Google Business Profile. The buyer states that the Google company profile was the subject of the purchase agreement concluded. This would appear from the fact that € 200,000 was paid for transferred goodwill. However, the seller points out that the purchase agreement stipulates that the sale does not include the right to use or ownership of the brand name, which name is reflected in the Google company profile. The claim is therefore rejected by the court, as it has not become apparent that the buyer has any claim to the Google company profile. After all, the purchase agreement does not mention this.
In franchising relationships, it is very important for business transfer to have agreements about who is entitled to, for example, a Google company profile, but also (other) social media accounts, such as LinkedIn, Facebook or Instagtam. This can be arranged in the purchase agreement during the transfer, but it may be even better to (also) lay this down in the franchise agreement in advance.
Ludwig & Van Dam lawyers, franchise legal advice.
Do you want to respond? Then email to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Bankrupt because the franchisor refused to sell the franchise company – dated January 28, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The District Court of The Hague has dealt with a request from a franchisor to declare a franchisee bankrupt.
Prescribed shop fitting – dated January 28, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Midden-Nederland District Court has ruled on whether a franchisee is obliged to carry the shop fittings prescribed by the franchisor.
Ludwig & Van Dam attorneys summon Sandd and PostNL on behalf of the Sandd franchisees – dated 9 January 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Association of Franchisees of Sandd (VFS) has today summoned Sandd and PostNL before the court in Arnhem. The VFS believes that Sandd and PostNL are letting the franchisees down hard.
Article The National Franchise Guide: “Why joint and several liability, for example, next to private?” – dated 7 January 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
Franchisees are often asked to co-sign the franchise agreement in addition to their franchise, for example. Sometimes franchisees refuse to do so and the franchise agreement is not signed.
Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten assists Sandd franchisees: Franchisees Sandd challenge postal monopoly in court – dated 12 November 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Association of Franchisees of Sandd (VFS) is challenging the decision of State Secretary Mona Keijzer to approve the postal merger between PostNL and Sandd before the court in Rotterdam.
Franchisee trapped by non-compete clause? – dated October 21, 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
The District Court of East Brabant has ruled that a franchisee was still bound by the non-competition clause in the event of premature termination of the franchise agreement.