Supermarket letter – 23

By Published On: 17-05-2018Categories: label11, SupermarketsTags:

                                                                  SUPERMARKET NEWSLETTER NO. 23

 

1. AH may not reduce wages when taking over personnel from AH franchisees;

2. Unjustified statements by FNV about wages and rickety seats of AH franchisee;   

3. Albert Heijn liable for a slippery floor.

In a case from FNV against Albert Heijn about employees whose wages at a franchisee were higher than the collective labor agreement wages, the question was whether Albert Heijn could reduce wages if it had taken over the franchisee’s shop.

 

Click here for the entire article.

  

Other messages

Amsterdam Court of Appeal restricts franchisor’s appeal to non-competition – dated July 6, 2020 – mr. T. Meijer

On 30 June 20202, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal ruled that a franchisor is not entitled to an (unlimited) appeal to a contractual non-competition clause.

Article Franchise+ – “Immediate information obligations of franchisors upon operation of the Franchise Act” – mr. AW Dolphijn – dated June 25, 2020

As soon as the Franchise Act enters into force, this will have an immediate effect on franchise agreements that already exist. The question is whether the information flows are set up optimally from a legal point of view.

By Alex Dolphijn|25-06-2020|Categories: Statements & current affairs|
Go to Top