Incorrect forecasts: franchisor must pay damages to franchisee
The court in Utrecht has recently rendered a judgment with regard to a prognosis issue. At issue in this case was that an incorrect operating forecast had been provided by the franchisor to the prospective franchisee. Based on this operating forecast, the franchisee decided to join the franchisor’s franchise formula. After all, the financial estimate provided by the franchisor with regard to the turnover to be realized and the profit to be realized is the most important starting point for a prospective franchisee to decide whether or not to actually enter a franchise formula. If in general this financial estimate provided by the franchisor turns out to be clearly incorrect, the franchisor is in principle liable for the associated damage, as suffered by the franchisee.
Gradually it turned out that the financial prognosis for the franchisee in question was completely incorrect, as a result of which the franchisee was forced to cease operations. The franchisee suffers considerable damage as a result, for which he holds the franchisor liable.
After an investigation, the court in Utrecht concludes that the location investigation, which formed the basis of the financial forecast in question, contains errors, including the following:
- The lack of relevant influences of (competitive) internet sales;
- An inadequate competitive analysis;
- An incorrect analysis with regard to relevant purchasing power binding.
The result of the incorrect business location survey is therefore that the financial forecast based on it is also a mistake.
The court deems it proven that the prospective franchisee was presented with a misrepresentation at the time he concluded the franchise agreement with the franchisor. Thus, the franchisee has erred. On the basis of this error, the court awards damages equal to an amount that the franchisee would have received if he had been employed.
The ruling shows once again that the pre-contractual phase between franchisor and franchisee cannot be handled with enough care. The operating forecasts provided by the franchisor must be clear, properly substantiated and sound. The same applies to its translation into the final contractual relationship between franchisor and franchisee.
Mr Th.R. Ludwig – Franchise Attorney
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice Would you like to respond? Mail to info@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Article Franchise+ – “Immediate information obligations of franchisors upon operation of the Franchise Act” – mr. AW Dolphijn – dated June 25, 2020
As soon as the Franchise Act enters into force, this will have an immediate effect on franchise agreements that already exist. The question is whether the information flows are set up optimally from a legal point of view.
Senate will adopt Franchise Act – dated 24 June 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The House of Representatives had unanimously adopted the proposal to introduce the Franchise Act on 16 June 2020
Franchise Act passed by the House of Representatives – dated 16 June 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Franchise Act was adopted by the House of Representatives on 16 June 2020.
Sandd franchisees find satisfaction in nullifying Sandd and PostNL merger – dated 12 June 2020
The franchisees of mail delivery company Sandd went to court in November, assisted by Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten. Court of Rotterdam rules on takeover by PostNL.
Plenary debate dated June 9, 2020 in the Lower House of the Franchise Act – dated June 10, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
On 9 June 2020, the legislative proposal for the Franchise Act was discussed in plenary in the House of Representatives. An amendment and a motion have been tabled.
Franchising is “a bottleneck in tackling healthcare fraud” – dated 10 June 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
According to the various supervisory authorities in the healthcare sector, franchise constructions can be seen as a non-transparent business construction in which the supervision of professional and