Success Albert Heijn franchisee against takeover Deen – mr. AW Dolphijn – dated July 29, 2021

An Albert Heijn franchisee has successfully defended itself against the takeover of local competitor Deen by the franchisor.

Albert Heijn, Vomar Voordeelmarkt and DekaMarkt were allowed to take over 80 Danish supermarkets from ACM. The Deen supermarkets were divided between the three supermarket chains. A franchisee saw that the Deen supermarket in the vicinity would be converted into Albert Heijn with that division. That would mean that the franchisee would get a local competitor with the same formula in the form of an Albert Heijn branch. Despite the short deadlines, the franchisee submitted a timely and motivated opinion to ACM. ACM then ruled that consumers in the local market area had too little choice in the variety of supermarkets. As a result, the local Deen supermarket will not be converted into an Albert Heijn supermarket, but converted into Vomar Voordeelmarkt.

Franchisees can indeed successfully challenge competition from their own franchisor. Attention to these issues can lead to better protection of one’s own market area.

The decision has been published by ACM under case number: ACM/21/050672 / Document no. ACM/OUT/558116.

mr. A.W. Dolphijn
Ludwig & Van Dam lawyers, franchise legal advice.
Do you want to respond? Then email to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl

Other messages

Interview Franchise+ – mrs. J. Sterk and AW Dolphijn – “Reversal burden of proof in forecasts honored by court”

The new Acquisition Fraud Act indeed appears to be relevant for the franchise industry, according to this article from Franchise+.

By Ludwig en van Dam|20-12-2017|Categories: Dispute settlement, Forecasting issues, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , , |

Franchisor convicted under the Acquisition Fraud Act

For the first time, a court has ruled, with reference to the Acquisition Fraud Act, that if a franchisee claims that the franchisor has presented an unsatisfactory prognosis

Agreements Related to the Franchise Agreement

On 31 October 2017, the Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal issued similar judgments for nineteen franchisees (ECLI:NL:GHARL:2017:9453 through ECLI:NL:GHARL:2017:9472).

Column Franchise+ – mr. J. Sterk – “Franchisee does body check better than franchise check”

A gym embarks on a franchise concept that offers “Body Checks” and discounts to (potential) members in collaboration with health insurers.

Seminar Mrs. J. Sterk and M. Munnik – Thursday, November 2, 2017: “Important legal developments for franchisors”

Attorneys Jeroen Sterk and Maaike Munnik of Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten will update you on the status of and developments surrounding the Dutch Franchise Code and the Acquisition Fraude Act.

By Jeroen Sterk|02-11-2017|Categories: Forecasting issues, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , |
Go to Top