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
The supplier prescribed by the franchisor is not performing? What now?
The Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch ruled on 20 February 2018, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2018:727, on the question of who must prove that the franchisee was misled when entering into the
Judge: Protect franchisee against supermarket organization (Coop) as lessor
Does the franchisee need legal protection from supermarket franchisor Coop? The District Court of Rotterdam ruled on 9 February 2018, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2018:1151, that this is the case.
Acquisition fraud vs. error in franchise forecasting
Who has to prove that the franchisor's forecast is unsound? In principle, this is the franchisee. If the franchisee invokes the Acquisition Fraud Act, it may be that
Obligation to sell back at the end of the franchise agreement
Franchise agreements sometimes provide that the franchisee is required to sell back purchased assets at the end of the franchise agreement.
Supermarket letter – 20
Uncertain legal position of Emté franchisees
Position of franchisees in franchisor restructuring
Franchisees must be adequately and generously informed in advance by the franchisor about the content and consequences of (further) agreements...