Rent indexation unrealistically high
Does an agreed rent indexation always apply? The District Court of The Hague ruled on 4 May 2023, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2023:8786, that a rent indexation based on the change in the CBS CPI could not be increased. The rent increase was unrealistically high.
The rental agreement stated that the rent would be indexed annually in accordance with the commonly used indexation clause. The indexation was based on the change in the CPI of Statistics Netherlands. On this basis, the rent would be increased by 14.5% with effect from 1 January 2023. The reason for the sharp increase is that energy prices had risen very substantially as a result of the war in Ukraine.
Statistics Netherlands had meanwhile announced that it had adopted a new calculation method for rent indexation, as a result of which a lower percentage would apply from June 2023. According to the court, the fact that Statistics Netherlands would not apply the new method until June 2023 does not mean that the old method should still be used. According to the court, it is sufficiently plausible in advance that the application of the old calculation method as of 1 January 2023 has led to an excessively high, unrealistic price index figure.
The landlord’s claim to increase the rent on the basis of indexation based on the change in the CBS CPI was rejected by the court.
It follows from this ruling that an agreed rent indexation is not inviolable, despite the fact that it has been agreed in black and white.
Ludwig & Van Dam lawyers, franchise legal advice.
Do you want to respond? Then email to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Franchisee obliged to cooperate with formula change?
On 24 March 2017, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2017:1860, the preliminary relief judge of the Amsterdam District Court once again considered the issue in which Intertoys wishes to convert Bart Smit's stores
Delivery stop by franchisor not allowed
On 9 February 2017, the preliminary relief judge of the District Court of Gelderland, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2017:1372, ruled that a franchisor had not fulfilled its obligation to supply the franchisee
Alex Dolphijn in the Financial Dagblad about the judgment of the Supreme Court regarding Street-One
Franchisors more liable for incorrect forecasts Franchisees can now more easily hold their parent organization liable for incorrect profit and turnover forecasts.
Supermarket letter – 17
Supreme Court: More quickly liable for forecasts
Article in Entrance: “Small print”
“When I do business with a supplier, I never read the fine print. Recently I noticed that there are all kinds of things in it that I actually do not agree with.
Column Franchise+ – mr. Th.R. Ludwig: “Delivery stop by franchisor again not allowed”
Once again, the president in preliminary relief proceedings ruled on the question whether a franchisor's supply stop against the franchisee was permitted, with the franchisee paying a substantial