No compensation of goodwill in franchise agreements? – January 28, 2016 – mr. AW Dolphin
On January 20, 2016, the Interim Relief Judge of the District Court of Amsterdam ruled, ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2016:353 (Ipic/franchisee Lelystad) that “compensation of goodwill is not normally an issue in franchise agreements”. The franchisor had entered into a franchise and rental agreement with a franchisee. On the basis of the provisions of Article 7:291 paragraph 2 of the Dutch Civil Code, the subdistrict court had approved the clause in the rental and franchise agreement, in the sense that, in short, upon termination of the franchise agreement, the rental agreement also ends, without a court order. intervention. Accordingly, the franchisor had terminated the franchise and lease agreement. The stipulation that deviates from the law, approved by the subdistrict court, also implies a contractually fixed remuneration to the franchisee.
The franchisee takes legal action against the termination, arguing, among other things, that the contractual termination compensation offered is too low and the franchisee is entitled to a higher goodwill compensation.
The preliminary relief judge considered that compensation of goodwill is not normally an issue in franchising agreements. This is one of the reasons why the franchisee’s argument is ignored. This consideration deserves attention. Not only because, pursuant to Section 7:308 of the Dutch Civil Code, a lessee may, under certain circumstances, claim a goodwill compensation in the event of termination by the lessor, but even more so now that the franchise agreement itself also grants compensation in the event of termination by the franchisor of the franchising property. and rental agreement. The latter occurs more often and is certainly no exception.
Incidentally, the judgment HR 12 July 2002, NJ 2002, 457 was not discussed, from which it follows that the compensation pursuant to Article 7:308 of the Dutch Civil Code cannot yet be claimed (in counterclaim) in the termination proceedings initiated by the lessor, because a claim to compensation can only arise if the business space is actually used for conducting a similar business.
It is true, however, that the compensation pursuant to Article 7:308 of the Dutch Civil Code in rental and franchise agreements is sometimes less high or difficult to allocate, precisely because it is obvious that any advantage of the lessor/franchisor in the exercise of a comparable continued business must be attributed to the franchise formula and not to the entrepreneurial activities of the former tenant/franchisee. It is of course highly dependent on the circumstances, but a goodwill compensation at the end of a franchise agreement does not seem impossible to me. Not even if this has not been agreed.
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
Supermarket Newsletter – 27
Supermarket Newsletter No. 27
Bankrupt because the franchisor refused to sell the franchise company – dated January 28, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The District Court of The Hague has dealt with a request from a franchisor to declare a franchisee bankrupt.
Prescribed shop fitting – dated January 28, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Midden-Nederland District Court has ruled on whether a franchisee is obliged to carry the shop fittings prescribed by the franchisor.
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.