Merged franchisor competes with proprietary franchisees
If a franchise organization is taken over, the intention may be that it is phased out in order to be integrated into the acquiring party. The question then is how to deal if potential customers flow from the franchisees of the acquired franchise organization to the new organization. The Midden-Nederland District Court ruled on such a matter on 29 July 2022, ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2022:3148.
Funeral organization Yarden has been taken over by competitor Dela. Yarden’s franchise organization and formula is being phased out to be integrated into Dela. Yarden’s customer contact center and phone number are at some point operated and handled by Dela. The services of Dela are also promoted in Yarden’s social media. As a result, Yarden’s franchisees suffer damage. The franchisees argue that Yarden competes with its own franchisees by referring to its (new) group company Dela.
Yarden stated that these are incidental errors, that effective measures have now been taken and that compensation is offered for the errors. The franchisees state that the errors and referrals continue. Furthermore, Yarden states that it cannot do much about the errors, but that it would be due to other organizations within its group, such as Yarden Uitvaarten BV
The court agrees with the franchisees and believes that the errors are not incidental, and that Yarden, as a franchisor, cannot hide behind the actions of affiliates. The court orders Yarden, as the franchisor, to cease referrals to Dela, under penalty of a penalty.
This judgment shows that the process of changing a franchise formula requires due diligence, which was lacking in this case.
Ludwig & Van Dam lawyers, franchise legal advice.
Do you want to respond? Then email to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
![109Alex-groot.nw_.2020.jpg](https://www.ludwigvandam.nl/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/109Alex-groot.nw_.2020-scaled.jpg)
Other messages
Agreements Related to the Franchise Agreement
On 31 October 2017, the Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal issued similar judgments for nineteen franchisees (ECLI:NL:GHARL:2017:9453 through ECLI:NL:GHARL:2017:9472).
Column Franchise+ – mr. J. Sterk – “Franchisee does body check better than franchise check”
A gym embarks on a franchise concept that offers “Body Checks” and discounts to (potential) members in collaboration with health insurers.
Seminar Mrs. J. Sterk and M. Munnik – Thursday, November 2, 2017: “Important legal developments for franchisors”
Attorneys Jeroen Sterk and Maaike Munnik of Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten will update you on the status of and developments surrounding the Dutch Franchise Code and the Acquisition Fraude Act.
Goodwill at end of franchise agreement
In a case before the Amsterdam Court of Appeal on 26 September 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:3900 (Seal & Go), a franchisee claimed compensation for goodwill (ex Article 7:308 of the Dutch Civil Code) after the
Article in Entrance: “Resignation”
Fire an employee who is not performing well? The subdistrict court is strict. If you, as an employer, cannot demonstrate that you have done everything yourself to make the person function better, it will be
Cost price that is too high as a hidden franchise fee
An interlocutory judgment of the District Court of The Hague dated 30 August 2017, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2017:10597 (Happy Nurse) shows that the court has considered the question whether the