Interview Mr. AW Doplphijn in Distrifood: “Legal consequences of merger Plus-Coop for entrepreneurs.” – dated September 12, 2021

By Published On: 13-09-2021Categories: Columns, Other Publications, Supermarkets

“Dolphin hereby cites a theory that is also alive among various Plus and Coop entrepreneurs with whom Distrifood has spoken in recent days. For the smallest Coop stores with (too) low weekly turnover, there simply does not seem to be a future at Plus. Spar then seems to be the ultimate destination, also because Plus Holding owns 45 percent of Spar. Plus boss Duncan Hoy and Coop CEO Fred Bosch, of course, did not come up with the Spar theory during the virtual press conference about the impending merger, but when the duo says that there will always be optimization in the store base. of course the rumours. Especially when a target number of 550 supermarkets is mentioned in the same presentation, while the two parties currently manage 584 stores together.

…”

 

mr. A.W. Dolphijn
Ludwig & Van Dam lawyers, franchise legal advice.
Do you want to respond? Then email to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl

Other messages

On the edge of a franchisee’s exclusive territory

The Court of Appeal of Arnhem-Leeuwarden ruled on 15 May 2018, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2018:4395, on the question whether a franchisor has a branch just over the edge of the exclusively granted protection area.

Can a franchisee cohabit with a competing entrepreneur?

Can a franchisee violate a non-compete clause by cohabiting with someone who runs a competing business? On January 12, 2018, the District Court of Central Netherlands ruled

Not an exclusive catchment area, but still exclusivity for the franchisee

The judgment of the District Court of Noord-Holland dated 18 April 2018, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2018:3268, ruled on the exclusivity area of ​​a franchisee.

Termination or dissolution of the franchise agreement by the franchisee

In principle, franchise agreements can be terminated prematurely, for example by cancellation or dissolution. On 21 March 2018, the District Court of Overijssel ruled on ECLI:NL:RBOVE:2018:1335 on

Go to Top