Termination of the franchise agreement does not automatically lead to termination of the sublease agreement
Court of Dordrecht
Franchisor terminated the franchise agreement with the franchisee. The franchise agreement stipulated that termination of the franchise agreement would also terminate the sublease agreement. However, the subdistrict court does not follow this reasoning at all. The termination of the rental agreement does not comply with the legal provisions and is therefore not legally valid. The stipulations in the lease on which the franchisor relies are deviating stipulations that have not been approved in advance by the subdistrict court judge and are therefore null and void.
In its recently issued judgment, the subdistrict court also considers that, although the franchise agreement and the rental agreement state that agreements are inextricably linked and that the end of one agreement also ends the other, there is no question of a so-called mixed agreement, and that the legal rent regime would also have been set aside. After all, both agreements can also exist independently of each other.
A proper link in advance with approval by the subdistrict court judge might have led to a different judgment. It is also remarkable that the Supreme Court has followed the doctrine of mixed agreements in recent years. Lower case law, however, apparently assumes the mandatory tenancy regime in which the franchise agreement exists separately from the sublease agreement, so that the franchisee enjoys full rent protection.
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
Obligation to sell back at the end of the franchise agreement
Franchise agreements sometimes provide that the franchisee is required to sell back purchased assets at the end of the franchise agreement.
Supermarket letter – 20
Uncertain legal position of Emté franchisees
Position of franchisees in franchisor restructuring
Franchisees must be adequately and generously informed in advance by the franchisor about the content and consequences of (further) agreements...
Interview Franchise+ – mrs. J. Sterk and AW Dolphijn – “Reversal of burden of proof in forecasts approved by court” – February 2018
The new Acquisition Fraud Act indeed appears to be relevant for the franchise industry, according to this article from Franchise+. Alex Dolphijn of Ludwig & Van Dam assists a franchisee in a
Article Franchise & Law No. 7 – Franchise agreement as general terms and conditions
Uniformity of the franchise formula and (therefore also) uniformity of the agreements with the franchisees will often be of great importance to the franchisor.
The franchisee’s customer base
If the partnership between a franchisee and a franchisor ends, the question of who will continue to serve the customers may arise.