The franchise agreement without (heavy demands on) know-how
In the 2023-1 edition of Contracting magazine, I published a contribution entitled: “The franchise agreement without (strict requirements for) know-how”.
For the qualification as a franchise agreement, the Franchise Act requires that there is a franchise formula of which know-how is a part. This law places high demands on this know-how. If these requirements are not met, there is no franchise agreement and the protective provisions of the Franchise Act are missing. The question is why such high demands are placed on know-how. It is concluded that the element of the necessarily present ‘know-how’ in the franchise formula should be weakened, so that the legal definition of the franchise agreement becomes broader.
The article can be ordered here from the publisher Boom Uitgevers.
Ludwig & Van Dam lawyers, franchise legal advice.
Do you want to respond? Then email to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Codification or self-regulation in the franchising sector
Codification or self-regulation in the franchising sector
Tenancy law and franchise: approval of deviating terms in the tenancy agreement, despite material infringement and the lack of an equal social position between the tenant and landlord
Tenancy law and franchise: approval of deviating clauses in the lease.
Business transfer franchisee: franchisor properly facilitates franchisee in settlement
On November 12, 2014, the District Court of Rotterdam ruled in a case between the franchisor and the franchisee about the lawfulness of the termination of the franchise agreement.
Franchising as urgent personal use
In a judgment dated 18 November 2014, the Court of Appeal in Den Bosch considered, among other things, whether a lessor may terminate the lease of business premises due to urgent personal use.
Can exclusion of error in forecasting benefit the franchisor?
Franchisors are often accused of failing before and when concluding a franchise agreement
Mistake about prognosis, annulment of non-compete clause?
Mistake about prognosis, annulment of non-compete clause?