Obligation to sell back at the end of the franchise agreement
Franchise agreements sometimes provide that the franchisee is required to sell back purchased assets at the end of the franchise agreement. What if the franchisee sold the assets to another before the end of the franchise agreement? The preliminary relief judge of the District Court of Central Netherlands ruled on this question on 29 December 2017, ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2017:6793.
Pursuant to the franchise agreement, the franchisee is obliged to purchase certain equipment for the operation of the franchise formula. The franchise agreement stipulates that the franchisee must sell the purchased equipment back to the franchisor.
The franchisee, on the other hand, argues that it sold the equipment to a third party (in good faith) which would prevent it from meeting the sell-back obligation. In that case, the former franchisee could perhaps only be ordered to pay replacement compensation in proceedings on the merits.
However, the preliminary relief judge does not believe that the former franchisee actually sold the equipment to a third party. The preliminary relief judge considers that the story of the former franchisee is implausible, partly because the sale allegedly took place to the brother of the former franchisee, the former franchisee continued to use the equipment and that the equipment was only very recently moved to the new location of the former franchisee.
The conclusion is that the former franchisee is ordered to make the equipment available to the franchisor.
mr. AW Dolphin – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Do you want to 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+.
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.
Goodwill at end of franchise agreement
In a case before the Amsterdam Court of Appeal on 26 September 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:3900 (Seal & Go), a franchisee claimed compensation for goodwill (ex Article 7:308 of the Dutch Civil Code) after the