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.
Ludwig & Van Dam lawyers, franchise legal advice.
Do you want to respond? Then email to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
![223carts-one-min](https://www.ludwigvandam.nl/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/223carts-one-min.jpg)
Other messages
Waiver of non-competition clause by franchisee
Waiver of non-competition clause by franchisee
End of main lease does not mean end of sublease with franchisee
On 7 July 2015, the Court of Appeal in Den Bosch overturned a judgment of the District Court of Limburg on the concurrence of a franchise agreement and a sublease agreement.
Chronicle Jurisprudence Franchise Law 2014
Chronicle Jurisprudence Franchise Law 2014
Attorneys Ludwig & Van Dam look back on transition process C1000
Attorneys Ludwig & Van Dam look back on transition process C1000
Court of Appeal upholds misrepresentation and wrongful conduct in the event of an unsatisfactory prognosis
The franchisee claimed annulment of the franchise agreement on the grounds of error, because the franchisor allegedly presented an unsatisfactory prognosis.
Directors’ Liability Concerning Franchising: Deception or Collaboration Plan
Directors' Liability Concerning Franchising: Deception or Collaboration Plan