No right to extension of franchise agreement – July 6, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin

May a franchisor refuse to renew the franchise agreement
if the franchisee does not agree to amended terms and conditions of a
new franchise agreement to be concluded? The District Court of Limburg ruled in
a judgment in summary proceedings of 29 May 2020, ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2020:3860, which in
the case presented, the franchisor was allowed to part with the
franchisee.

The franchisee took the position that the franchisor
acts unlawfully or misuses its authority and
dominant position, by imposing unreasonable conditions for renewal
and by refusing to further negotiate renewal on a reasonable basis
terms or give them more time to sell. If the
franchisee would be forced to cease operation, there would be
enormous damage.

The franchisor had always taken the initiative to change the existing
franchise agreements. She pointed out that
request for extension had to be made no later than six months before its expiry
be submitted and how it should be done. Franchisee has it
never requested such an extension on its own initiative and in a timely manner.
The franchisee had changed positions over time.
Initially they did not want to extend, then they did, but not on
conditions according to the new agreement, then they wanted the
selling branches.

The franchisee is ordered to terminate the use of
the franchise formula under penalty of a penalty.

It strongly depends on the situation whether and how
franchise agreement is legally terminated and how the
negotiations have to be qualified, who does this (on each occasion).
takes the initiative and what the position of the parties is.

 

mr. AW Dolphijn – franchise lawyer

Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Want
you respond? Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl

Other messages

Duty of care franchisor in the pre-contractual phase

The District Court of Limburg ruled on 6 April 2017, ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2016:2843, that the franchisor has a duty of care towards the prospective franchisee in the pre-contractual phase.

Franchisee avoids joint and several liability in private

In a judgment of 28 March 2018, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2018:2913, the District Court of Rotterdam ruled on the meaning of the clause in the franchise agreement stipulating that

Incorrect prognosis due to lack of location research

The District Court of The Hague ruled on 21 March 2018, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2018:3348, that a franchisor's forecast was unsound, as a result of which the franchisee had erred and the franchisor

Column Franchise+ – “Disputes about franchise fees”

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: , |

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: , |
Go to Top