The healthcare franchisor is not a healthcare provider
The Healthcare Quality, Complaints and Disputes Act (WKKGZ) creates the possibility of government measures being imposed on healthcare institutions to guarantee the required quality of healthcare. Can such a measure of the Health and Youth Care Inspectorate be imposed on a franchisor? The District Court of Rotterdam ruled on this on 25 January 2018, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2018:495
At issue was that a franchisor operates a franchise formula in the healthcare sector. There was an incident with a patient at a franchisee in Tilburg, in which the patient eventually died. The franchisee in question has entered into discussions with the Inspectorate and has implemented a number of improvements. The Inspectorate then visited a franchisee in Arnhem. It was established that this franchisee (also) did not meet the safety standards.
The Inspectorate then took a decision based on the WKKGZ, on the basis of which the franchisor must take measures to guarantee the necessary care. It has also been decided to publish the relevant decision as a press release on the Inspectorate’s website.
The franchisor believes that it cannot be qualified as a “care provider” and that therefore no measures can be imposed on it by the Inspectorate. It is argued against this that the franchisor, together with its franchisees, forms an organizational relationship that serves to provide professional care. This is because the franchisor creates conditions for its franchisees for the provision of good care and the franchisor can therefore be qualified as a care provider.
The court rules that in this case the franchisor cannot be qualified as a ‘care provider’. The following is decisive for this:
- the franchisees enter into contracts with clients/patients in their own name;
- the franchisees themselves provide accommodation for clients/patients;
- no further obligation is imposed on the franchisees by the franchisor on the basis of a franchise agreement other than to provide care that is in accordance with legal requirements;
- the franchisees are independent companies that are not subordinate to the franchisor.
It follows from the foregoing that not in all cases a franchisor cannot also be qualified as a ‘care provider’ within the meaning of the WKKGZ. What will be important is how the actual organization is put together and, in particular, the content and purport of the franchise agreement. Franchisors in the healthcare sector, but also franchisees in the healthcare sector, should ask themselves whether they fall under the WKKGZ as a healthcare provider, given the far-reaching implications of this law.
mr. AW Dolphijn – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Do you want to respond? Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl .
Other messages
Bankrupt because the franchisor refused to sell the franchise company – dated January 28, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The District Court of The Hague has dealt with a request from a franchisor to declare a franchisee bankrupt.
Prescribed shop fitting – dated January 28, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Midden-Nederland District Court has ruled on whether a franchisee is obliged to carry the shop fittings prescribed by the franchisor.
Ludwig & Van Dam attorneys summon Sandd and PostNL on behalf of the Sandd franchisees – dated 9 January 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Association of Franchisees of Sandd (VFS) has today summoned Sandd and PostNL before the court in Arnhem. The VFS believes that Sandd and PostNL are letting the franchisees down hard.
Article The National Franchise Guide: “Why joint and several liability, for example, next to private?” – dated 7 January 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
Franchisees are often asked to co-sign the franchise agreement in addition to their franchise, for example. Sometimes franchisees refuse to do so and the franchise agreement is not signed.
Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten assists Sandd franchisees: Franchisees Sandd challenge postal monopoly in court – dated 12 November 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Association of Franchisees of Sandd (VFS) is challenging the decision of State Secretary Mona Keijzer to approve the postal merger between PostNL and Sandd before the court in Rotterdam.
Franchisee trapped by non-compete clause? – dated October 21, 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
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.