Sandd franchisees find satisfaction in nullifying Sandd and PostNL merger – dated 12 June 2020
The franchisees of mail delivery company Sandd went to the in November
judge, assisted by Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten. The franchisees
accused the State Secretary of negligent weighing of interests
made. Where the Secretary of State submitted a bill to
protection of the franchisees, Sandd’s franchisees become in
the whole thing was left behind in the merger with PostNL by the same
Secretary of State.
The Association of Franchisees of Sandd (VFS) says in a response that the
judgment of the Rotterdam court is a form of satisfaction, although
reversing the merger ‘unrealistic’. President Mario de
Koning: ‘But it is a paper settlement. We want our gram
and we have not been so much against the merger as against it
unilateral termination of contracts in the very short term. On a neat
saying goodbye to each other was not an issue. Some
franchisees had to liquidate their businesses. That has been a drama
for these family businesses.’ DeVFS has another civil case against Sandd
and PostNL at the court in Arnhem. Bet is an indemnity
for suffered (contract) damage.
See also the Financieele Dagblad of 12 June 2020 (download at the bottom right of this message).
mr. AW Dolphijn – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Do you want to respond? Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Update Franchise Law
On 23 May 2018, the government indicated that it would prepare a legal regulation that creates a framework for four sub-areas of cooperation between franchisors and franchisees that are crucial
On the edge of a franchisee’s exclusive territory
The Court of Appeal of Arnhem-Leeuwarden ruled on 15 May 2018, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2018:4395, on the question whether a franchisor has a branch just over the edge of the exclusively granted protection area.
Can a franchisee cohabit with a competing entrepreneur?
Can a franchisee violate a non-compete clause by cohabiting with someone who runs a competing business? On January 12, 2018, the District Court of Central Netherlands ruled
Not an exclusive catchment area, but still exclusivity for the franchisee
The judgment of the District Court of Noord-Holland dated 18 April 2018, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2018:3268, ruled on the exclusivity area of a franchisee.
Supermarket letter – 23
AH may not reduce wages when taking over personnel from AH franchisees;
Termination or dissolution of the franchise agreement by the franchisee
In principle, franchise agreements can be terminated prematurely, for example by cancellation or dissolution. On 21 March 2018, the District Court of Overijssel ruled on ECLI:NL:RBOVE:2018:1335 on