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

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.

Burden of proof reversal in forecasting as misleading advertising?

In an interlocutory judgment of 15 June 2017, the District Court of Zeeland-West-Brabant, ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2017:3833, ruled on a claim for (among other things) suspension of the non-compete clause.

Fine for franchisor because aspiring franchisee is foreigner

On 5 July 2017, the Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2017:1815, decided whether, in the case of (proposed) cooperation between a franchisor and a prospective franchisee, the franchisor

Article in Entrance: “Company name”

“I came up with a wonderful name for my catering company and incurred the necessary costs for this. Now there is another entrepreneur who is going to use almost the same one. Is that allowed?"

By Alex Dolphijn|01-07-2017|Categories: Dispute settlement, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , |
Go to Top