Recommendations by the franchisor in general terms are permitted – dated March 6, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Amsterdam Court of Appeal ruled on January 21, 2020,
ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2020:116, which is the information provided by a franchisor
about increasing turnover, cost savings, more clientele and customer loyalty
is too general in nature to invoke acquisition fraud or error
make it succeed. There is no question of deception by the franchisor and the
The (prospective) franchisee cannot be blamed by the franchisor for this
wrong leg.
In that context, it has also been ruled that a potential franchisee is allowed
be expected to know that the franchise formula is focused on business
as revenue increase and cost savings, but that concrete results of
depend on many circumstances, such as, for example, the manner
on which the franchisee conducts his business.
It is true that, if the franchisor has concrete information about
turnover forecasts and the like, he acts unlawfully if he does so
information is incorrect and he knows this, or his carelessness leads to
which led to errors. The court refers to the judgment
HR 24-02-2017, ECLI:NL:HR:2017:311 regarding Street One. In this case it is
however, such concrete information is not provided by the franchisor
provided. That is also stated in the agreement in so many words, it said
court of justice.
The boundary between praise in general terms and
on the other hand, culpable deception and misrepresentation,
remains a tricky issue.
mr. AW Dolphijn – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Want
you respond?
Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
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.
Does a franchisee have to accept a new model franchise agreement?
On 31 March 2017, the District Court of Rotterdam, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2017:2457, ruled in interlocutory proceedings on the question whether franchisor Bram Ladage had complied with the franchise agreement with its franchisee.
Mandatory (market-based) purchase prices for franchisees
To what extent can a franchisor change agreements about the (market) purchase prices of the goods that the franchisees are obliged to purchase?