Qualification of renting industrial premises and its consequences
Under the new tenancy law, it is clearer than before when there is a question of renting industrial space and renting other space. This distinction is important when there is a link with the franchise agreement. If the franchisor independently rents space and in turn sublets it to the franchisee, there is a franchise agreement and a sublease agreement between the franchisor and the franchisee. Ideally, these agreements are properly linked to avoid different terms or non-simultaneous termination. If there is a lease of business space within the meaning of Article 7:290 paragraph 2 of the Dutch Civil Code, the main statutory rule applies that, subject to exceptions, the business space must be made available for two times five years. In that case, it is advisable to construct a relevant link to the franchise agreement in that sense.
In that case, it is important to first determine whether such business premises or other business space are involved. Examples of retail business premises include a hairdresser, kiosk, station restaurant, textile store, and video store.
Doubtful is a pharmacy and a showroom.
Other business premises, where in principle the main rule of term protection of two times five years is not present and therefore a fundamentally different link to the franchise agreement must be made are a beauty salon, a fitness center and a bicycle shed.
It is very important to carefully determine in advance when there is business space of a retail company or other space. Partly depending on the correct qualification, an adequate rental link must then be constructed between the relevant (sub)lease agreement and the franchise agreement. Careful consideration in advance prevents surprises during (premature) termination and settlement.
Ludwig & Van Dam franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice
Other messages
Damage estimate after wrongful termination of the franchise agreement by the franchisor
In a judgment of the Supreme Court of 15 September 2017, ECLI:NL:HR:2017:2372 (Franchisee/Coop), it was discussed that supermarket organization Coop had not complied with agreements, as a result of which the franchisee
Franchisor is obliged to extend the franchise agreement
On 6 September 2017, the Rotterdam District Court ruled, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2017:6975 (Misty / Bram Ladage), that the refusal to extend a franchise agreement by a franchisor
The (in)validity of a post-contractual non-competition clause in a franchise agreement: analogy with employment law?
On 5 September 2017, the District Court of Gelderland, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2017:4565, rendered a judgment on, among other things, the question of whether Bruna, as a franchisor, could invoke the prohibition for a
Column Franchise+ – mr. J Sterk: “Court orders fast food chain to extend franchise agreement
The case is set to begin this year. For years, the franchisee has been refusing to sign the new franchise agreement that was offered with renewal, as it would lead to a deterioration of his legal position
Not a valid non-compete clause for franchisee
On 18 November 2016, the interim relief judge of the Central Netherlands District Court, ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2016:7754, rendered a judgment in the issue concerning whether the franchisee was held
Franchise & Law No. 5 – Acquisition Fraud and Franchising Act
The Acquisition Fraud Act came into effect on 1 July 2016. This includes amendments to Section 6:194 of the Dutch Civil Code.