Preferential right of purchase in lease does not apply – September 7, 2018 – mr. AW Dolphin
The District Court of The Hague ruled on 5 September 2018, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2018:10554, that a share transaction within the tenant’s organization does not mean that the landlord can invoke the pre-emptive right stipulated in favor of the landlord of buy.
However, it should be noted that the rental agreement and the pre-emptive right of purchase were concluded at the time by expert parties and expert advisers and that there was an ‘intercompany’ rental agreement within the same group. Therefore, according to the court, great weight should be attached to the linguistic meaning of the chosen wording of the agreement in this specific case. Therefore, the pre-emptive right of purchase cannot be circumvented in all cases by means of a transaction of the shares in the lessee.
mr. AW Dolphin – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Do you want to respond? Contact
Other messages
Article in Entrance: “New owner”
“The catering company where I work has been taken over. The new owner now says that I no longer have to work for him, but can he refuse me as an employee?”
Directors’ liability in the settlement of a franchise agreement
Privately, can the director of a franchisee legal entity be liable to the franchisor if the franchisee legal entity wrongfully fails to provide business to the franchisor?
Column Franchise + – mr. Th.R. Ludwig: “Towards strict liability”
The Supreme Court recently ruled in a prognosis issue.
Article in Entrance: “Rentals”
“The landlord increased the prices of the property every year, but he hasn't done this for 2 years, maybe he forgets. Can he still claim an overdue amount later?”
No valid appeal to non-compete clause in franchising
On 28 February 2017, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2017:1469, the provisional relief judge of the District Court of Gelderland ruled on whether a franchisee could be bound by a non-compete clause.
Structurally unsound revenue forecasts from the franchisor
On 15 March 2017, the District Court of Limburg ruled in eight similar judgments (including ECLI:NL:RBLIM:2017:2344) on the franchise agreements of various franchisees of the P3 franchise formula.