Non-competition clause
Franchise agreements more than once include a non-compete clause with respect to the period after the franchise agreement has been terminated. This period is usually one year after the contract has been terminated and the franchisee concerned must, in short, refrain from activities that are competitive with the activities of the franchise organization during that period. As discussed in this section, for example, such non-compete clauses must comply with various rules. For example, the non-compete clause must fit into the competition law regime in which the franchise organization finds itself, partly depending on its market share.
Furthermore, the non-compete clause must pass the civil law reasonableness test. Each of those topics can fill several contributions like this one. This contribution draws attention to the fact that non-compete clauses must at all times be formulated with the utmost care and that when formulating a non-compete clause, the franchisor must also carefully envision what is intended, in particular which activities exactly during the period after contract termination should be prohibited. Recent case law once again shows that the court interprets a non-compete clause, which incidentally derives from employment law practice, extremely restrictively and, when assessing it, analyzes the clause in a grammatical manner. In general, it is therefore not sufficient to “explain” a non-compete clause, to act “in the spirit” of the provisions of the non-compete clause or the like. If a non-competition clause is to have the intended effect, it will have to be literally grammatically and linguistically determined what is intended by the clause. It is therefore important to make sure of this in advance, in order to avoid unpleasant surprises afterwards.
Ludwig & Van Dam franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice
Other messages
The benchmark for franchise forecasts – dated 29 May 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
On 19 March 2019, the Den Bosch Court of Appeal, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2019:1037, listed the case law of the Supreme Court on prognosis in franchising.
Franchise arbitration: too high a threshold? – mr. M. Munnik
When entering into an agreement, it is possible for the parties - contrary to the law - to designate a competent court. This also applies to the franchise agreement. Of this possibility
Franchise appeal for error due to incorrect forecasts and lack of support rejected – dated April 25, 2019 – mr. K. Bastian
The Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch ruled (ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2019:697) on the question whether the mere fact that forecasts did not materialize justifies the conclusion that the franchisee has been shortchanged...
Article De Nationale Franchise Gids: “Increasing protection against recruiting franchisees” – dated 2 April 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
It is becoming increasingly apparent that recruited franchisees can be protected on the basis of the Acquisition Fraud Act.
The Franchise Association and Franchise Binding – Contracting 2019, No. 1
A contribution on common provisions in franchise agreements that require a franchisee to be a member of a franchisee's association.
Deception in recruiting a franchisee?
A ruling on whether the franchisor had made a misrepresentation when recruiting a franchisee.