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

Interview Franchise+ – mrs. J. Sterk and AW Dolphijn – “Reversal burden of proof in forecasts honored by court”

The new Acquisition Fraud Act indeed appears to be relevant for the franchise industry, according to this article from Franchise+.

By Ludwig en van Dam|20-12-2017|Categories: Dispute settlement, Forecasting issues, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , , |

Franchisor convicted under the Acquisition Fraud Act

For the first time, a court has ruled, with reference to the Acquisition Fraud Act, that if a franchisee claims that the franchisor has presented an unsatisfactory prognosis

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.

By Jeroen Sterk|02-11-2017|Categories: Forecasting issues, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , |
Go to Top