Incorrect prognosis due to lack of location research
On 21 March 2018, the District Court of The Hague ruled, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2018:3348, that a franchisor’s forecast was unsound, as a result of which the franchisee had erred and the franchisor had acted unlawfully.
Contrary to what was stated in the franchise agreement, the franchisor had not conducted a location survey. Nor had the franchisor conducted any research among its own franchisees. The franchisor has acknowledged that it only used historical turnover and profit data (annual figures) of two stores when drawing up the forecasts. Furthermore, the franchisor had not sufficiently disputed that the aforementioned two stores differed substantially in terms of retail space, location and product range.
The predictive value of (merely) historical turnover and profit data is relative, especially now that the franchisor determines both the purchase prices and the sales prices of its franchisees in accordance with its franchise formula, according to the court.
The operating results turn out to be considerably lower than forecast. The court considers that the franchisor must, in principle, guarantee the soundness of the operating forecasts (prepared by itself) that it had provided to the franchisee. After all, the franchisee could assume that it could rely on the information provided by the franchisor, because a large franchisor, such as in the present case, with more than a hundred franchised pet specialty shops in the Netherlands, can be pre-eminently considered to be aware of all market conditions relevant to the potential turnover of the VOF, and on the basis thereof be able to make realistic estimates of the turnover opportunities arising from those circumstances.
On the basis of the foregoing, the court is therefore of the opinion that the operating forecasts drawn up by the franchisor are unsound and that the franchise agreement was concluded under the influence of error as a result of errors in the operating forecast provided by the franchisor.
mr. AW Dolphijn – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Do you want to respond? Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl .
Other messages
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
Column Franchise+ – Franchisor acts unlawfully by providing a forecast through a third party
Disputes about forecasts between franchisor and franchisee remain a hot topic in franchising. After the Street-One judgment, it seems that franchisors feel safe
Column Franchise+ – Outsourcing forecasting to an administrative office does not benefit the franchisor
Disputes about forecasts between franchisor and franchisee remain a hot topic in franchising. After the Street-One judgment, it seems that franchisors feel safe
Outsourcing prognosis to an administrative office does not benefit the franchisor
Disputes about forecasts between franchisor and franchisee remain a hot topic in franchising.
Contribution Mr. AW Dolphijn in Contracting magazine 2018, no. 1: “The unilateral amendment clause in the franchise agreement.”
A contribution by mr Dolphijn has been published in the magazine Contracteren entitled: “The unilateral amendment clause in the Franchise Agreement”.