Supreme Court confirms permit sale of franchisee outside exclusive district
High Council
Franchisee acquires and sells outside its territory, in territories not yet issued to other franchisees. Franchisor objects to this state of affairs and requests them to stop this subject to dissolution of the franchise agreement. The parties will make further agreements on how to deal with the problem. Ultimately, this results in a conflict in which the franchisor dissolves the franchise contract out of court. During a court hearing, both the franchisor and the franchisee argued that the franchisee was allowed to work in territories that had not yet been assigned to anyone. In the end, the franchisor’s argument that the franchisee was not allowed to do this does not hold up either in court or in the highest instance, i.e. the Supreme Court.
NB: Franchisor and franchisee need not even have agreed that the franchisee was allowed to operate in territories that had not yet been allocated, unless otherwise agreed in this context. On competition law grounds, a franchisee is always permitted to do this and in principle a franchisee may not be restricted in this, unless a nuanced arrangement, for example reserving the areas for the franchisor itself, has been agreed between the franchisor and the franchisee.
Mr Th.R. Ludwig – Franchise lawyer Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice Would you like to respond? Mail to ludwig@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Goodwill at end of franchise agreement
In a case before the Amsterdam Court of Appeal on 26 September 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:3900 (Seal & Go), a franchisee claimed compensation for goodwill (ex Article 7:308 of the Dutch Civil Code) after the
Article in Entrance: “Resignation”
Fire an employee who is not performing well? The subdistrict court is strict. If you, as an employer, cannot demonstrate that you have done everything yourself to make the person function better, it will be
Cost price that is too high as a hidden franchise fee
An interlocutory judgment of the District Court of The Hague dated 30 August 2017, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2017:10597 (Happy Nurse) shows that the court has considered the question whether the
Supermarket letter – 19
Coop liability for damages due to non-performance towards the franchisee
Damage estimate after wrongful termination of the franchise agreement by the franchisor
In a judgment of the Supreme Court of 15 September 2017, ECLI:NL:HR:2017:2372 (Franchisee/Coop), it was discussed that supermarket organization Coop had not complied with agreements, as a result of which the franchisee
Franchisor is obliged to extend the franchise agreement
On 6 September 2017, the Rotterdam District Court ruled, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2017:6975 (Misty / Bram Ladage), that the refusal to extend a franchise agreement by a franchisor