Franchisee competition ban: error in forecasting and transfer of know-how?
In preliminary relief proceedings, a franchisee demands that the franchisor ...
In preliminary relief proceedings, a franchisee demands that the franchisor ...
A non-competition clause in a franchise agreement is often experienced as objectionable by franchisees, especially if the non-competition clause also applies after the franchise agreement has expired.
The District Court of East Brabant has ruled that a franchisee was still bound by the non-competition clause in the event of premature termination of the franchise agreement.
When a franchise agreement ends, many franchisees encounter a prohibition in the franchise agreement to perform similar work for a period of time thereafter
Franchisees who are unwilling or unable to continue with the franchise company experience whether or not the non-competition clause is valid or not.
A franchisor applied for interim measures to prohibit a franchisee from opening a franchisee's business.
The Court of Appeal of Arnhem-Leeuwarden ruled on 15 May 2018, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2018:4395, on the question whether a franchisor has a branch just over the edge of the exclusively granted protection area.
On 3 April 2018, the Court of Appeal of Arnhem-Leeuwarden, ECLI:NL:GHARL:2018:3128, overturned an interim injunction of the District Court of Gelderland on competitive activities.
Franchise agreements sometimes provide that the franchisee is required to sell back purchased assets at the end of the franchise agreement.
If the partnership between a franchisee and a franchisor ends, the question of who will continue to serve the customers may arise.