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
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?
Director’s liability of a franchisee after failing to rely on an unsound prognosis.
On 11 July 2017, the Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch made a decision on whether the franchisor could successfully sue the director of a BV for non-compliance with the
Liability accountant for prepared prognosis?
In a judgment of the Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch of 11 July 2017, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2017:3153, it was discussed that franchisees accused the franchisor's accountant of being liable
How far does the bank’s duty of care extend?
Some time ago the question was raised in case law what the position of the bank is in the triangular relationship franchisor – bank – franchisee.