Mandatory transfer of franchise business to franchisor?
On 23 January 2017, the District Court of Amsterdam, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2017:412 (CoffeeCompany/Dam Spirit BV) rendered a judgment on the question whether a franchisee is obliged to return his franchise company upon termination of the cooperation with the franchisor. delivery to the franchisor.
Before the catering entrepreneur in question entered into cooperation with the franchisor, the catering entrepreneur in question had already rented the catering business space on Dam Square in Amsterdam for some time. A catering permit was also present from the start of the rental.
A cooperation agreement, called a license agreement, was subsequently concluded between the parties, under which the franchisee obtained the right to operate the catering establishment according to a specific formula of the franchisor. It was included in that agreement that upon termination of this agreement, the franchisor was entitled to continue the business itself at the location where the franchisee worked. After the cooperation has ended, the franchisor demands from the former franchisee to offer it the lease rights to the business space in question, or at least to cooperate in substituting the franchisor as tenant.
The court considers that there is no question of a termination situation, but that the cooperation has ended by operation of law due to the passage of time. The court also considers it illogical that the franchisee was prepared to offer the lease rights to the franchisor when the cooperation ended. The court therefore rejects the franchisor’s claim to transfer the franchise company to it.
It follows from this ruling that if the parties wish to make a far-reaching agreement about the transfer of the franchise company at the end of the cooperation, this must be explicitly stated in order to avoid misunderstandings afterwards.
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
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.
Supermarket letter – 26
Supermarket Newsletter No. 26
Link franchise agreement and rental agreement uncertain? – dated October 14, 2019 – mr K. Bastiaans
It is no exception within a franchise relationship that the parties agree that the franchise agreement and the rental agreement are inextricably linked.