Transfer of the franchisor
Most franchise agreements include a comprehensive transfer arrangement for the benefit of the franchisee, detailing how the franchisee may transfer its business to a third party if it so desires. However, the franchisor can also transfer his company, although franchise agreements often contain little or nothing about this. A provision that sometimes recurs is that the franchisor is free to transfer his business to a third party, provided that this does not affect or encumber the rights of the franchisees in any way. That is of course also correct and summarizes the point in a nutshell: ideally, a franchisee will not notice a takeover or sale of the franchisor’s business.
However, this does imply that both the selling party and the acquiring party must realize that the rights of the franchisees cannot actually be challenged. Incidentally, this is a principle that arises from contract law itself and therefore also applies if the franchise agreement does not expressly contain a provision to that effect. In practice, it sometimes happens that franchise organizations are transferred to third parties while there are conflicts within that organization between the franchisor and one or more franchisees. Perhaps unnecessarily, it should be noted in that context that the transfer of the franchise organization does not imply the end of that conflict. It is then one of the two: either the acquiring party will in so many words, made known to the franchisee(s) involved, also “take over the conflict”, or the selling party will declare in so many words that it is responsible for the further settlement of the that conflict, in both cases including the settlement of any compensation obligations and the like. In this context, it is good franchising practice to inform all franchisees, including those involved in the conflict, of the intended transfer and its consequences in a timely manner, in the broadest sense of the word, so that both the business operations in a broad sense the franchisees, as well as the handling and further settlement of the conflict as a result of the acquisition.
Ludwig & Van Dam franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice
Other messages
The (in)validity of a post-contractual non-competition clause in a franchise agreement: analogy with employment law?
On 5 September 2017, the District Court of Gelderland, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2017:4565, rendered a judgment on, among other things, the question of whether Bruna, as a franchisor, could invoke the prohibition for a
Column Franchise+ – mr. J Sterk: “Court orders fast food chain to extend franchise agreement
The case is set to begin this year. For years, the franchisee has been refusing to sign the new franchise agreement that was offered with renewal, as it would lead to a deterioration of his legal position
Not a valid non-compete clause for franchisee
On 18 November 2016, the interim relief judge of the Central Netherlands District Court, ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2016:7754, rendered a judgment in the issue concerning whether the franchisee was held
Franchise & Law No. 5 – Acquisition Fraud and Franchising Act
The Acquisition Fraud Act came into effect on 1 July 2016. This includes amendments to Section 6:194 of the Dutch Civil Code.
Does a franchisee have to accept a new model franchise agreement?
On 31 March 2017, the District Court of Rotterdam, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2017:2457, ruled in interlocutory proceedings on the question whether franchisor Bram Ladage had complied with the franchise agreement with its franchisee.
Mandatory (market-based) purchase prices for franchisees
To what extent can a franchisor change agreements about the (market) purchase prices of the goods that the franchisees are obliged to purchase?