Nice weather as an excuse?

Legal discussions are regularly held about the question of whether disappointing visitor numbers in a (new) shopping center can be blamed on the lessor. Recently some statements have been made in this regard. These statements are important because estimates of visitor numbers may form part of forecasts as made available to the franchisee by the franchisor. The culpability can therefore extend to the franchisor and is therefore not limited to the operator of the shopping centre.
Whether disappointing visitor numbers in a (new) shopping center can be blamed depends very much on the facts and circumstances of the case. In concrete terms, this means that the lessor and/or the franchisor may indeed be liable if the figures presented turned out to be unrealistic afterwards.

An independent research obligation of the prospective tenant/franchisee is of course important in this respect. As a professional counterparty, the necessary may be expected of him in this regard. However, if a shopping center provides very clear figures that are also decisive for entering into the final rental agreement, then this can indeed be decisive. It is also important to check to what extent the data of the shopping center has been taken into account in the final forecast and to what extent these data are decisive for any deviations found. In this context, a professional attitude from the franchisor may be expected. Generalities such as economic malaise or a buyers’ strike because of the warm weather are therefore not valid.

Ludwig & Van Dam franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice

Other messages

Column Franchise+ – “Flashing quarrels about franchise fee must stop”

Lately, it has also hit the biggest franchise organizations in the Netherlands. At the formulas of Albert Heijn, HEMA, Etos, Bruna and Olympia, for example, there was and will be a lot

By Alex Dolphijn|09-04-2018|Categories: Dispute settlement, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , |

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

By Remy Albers|09-04-2018|Categories: Competition, Statements & current affairs|Tags: |

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

By Maaike Munnik|04-04-2018|Categories: Forecasting issues, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , |

Outsourcing prognosis to an administrative office does not benefit the franchisor

Disputes about forecasts between franchisor and franchisee remain a hot topic in franchising.

Go to Top