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
Infringement of exclusive service area by franchisor in connection with formula change dated February 27, 2017
On 30 January 2017, the provisional relief judge of the District Court of Noord-Holland, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2017:688 (Intertoys/franchisee), was asked how to deal with the
Forecasts at startup franchise formula
The Amsterdam Court of Appeal ruled on 14 February 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:455 (Tot Straks/franchisee) on the question whether the franchisor had provided an unsatisfactory prognosis and whether the
Mandatory transfer of franchise business to franchisor?
On January 23, 2017, the District Court of Amsterdam, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2017:412 (CoffeeCompany/Dam Spirit BV) rendered a judgment on the question whether a franchisee upon termination of the cooperation
Transfer customer data to franchisor
In its judgment of 10 January 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:68 (OnlineAccountants.nl), the Amsterdam Court ruled, among other things, on the question of how customer data should be transferred.
Franchise Closing Sale – Who Gets the Sale Proceeds?
The judgment of the District Court of the Northern Netherlands dated 12 October 2016, ECLI:NL:RBNNE:2016:5061 (Administrator/Expert Group and Rabobank), focused on the question whether the franchisor, together with the bank,
Column Franchise+ – mr. Th.R. Ludwig: “Judge: franchisor’s duty of care comparable to that of a bank”
Various judgments in 2016 made it clear how high the standard of care for a franchisor towards its franchisees is.