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
![](https://ludwigvandam.megaconcept.nl/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/232court-min-400x222.jpg)
Other messages
Burden of proof reversal in forecasting as misleading advertising?
In an interlocutory judgment of 15 June 2017, the District Court of Zeeland-West-Brabant, ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2017:3833, ruled on a claim for (among other things) suspension of the non-compete clause.
Fine for franchisor because aspiring franchisee is foreigner
On 5 July 2017, the Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2017:1815, decided whether, in the case of (proposed) cooperation between a franchisor and a prospective franchisee, the franchisor
Article in Entrance: “Company name”
“I came up with a wonderful name for my catering company and incurred the necessary costs for this. Now there is another entrepreneur who is going to use almost the same one. Is that allowed?"
The bank’s duty of care in franchise agreements
On 23 May 2017, the Court of Appeal in The Hague, EQLI:NL:GHDHA:2017:1368, had to rule on the question whether the bank should have warned a prospective franchisee in connection with the
Article in Entrance: “Standing up”
“Can I fire an employee with immediate effect if he steals something trivial, such as food that has passed its expiration date?”
Arbitration clause in franchise agreement sometimes inconvenient
On 20 July 2016, the District Court of Gelderland, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2016:4868, ruled on the validity of an agreement in a franchise agreement, whereby disputes would be settled