ACM imposes conditions on merger Coop/Plus – mr. J. Sterk – December 23, 2021
Today, ACM announced that it would approve the merger under the condition that shops must be sold in 12 market areas, otherwise there would be too little competition in those market areas. The areas are: Harmelen, Hollandscheveld, Rolde, Ruurlo, Stolwijk, Terborg, Wehl, Groot Ammers, Wekerom, Ravenstein, Uddel and Vlieland. Businesses are also located in these areas.
Although the full decision has not yet been published, it seems to be possible to deduce from these areas that ACM has also included Plus’ participation in Spar in its considerations.
For the entrepreneurs involved, this means that solutions must be sought within a non-public period set by ACM. In the past, this has happened in a similar way, for example with the transition from C1000 to Jumbo. Which has not worked out well in all cases. Entrepreneurs involved must be assisted in this negotiation by experts, so that they can properly assess the opportunities and risks of the situation that has arisen. Now that Spar seems to be involved, it is also questionable whether there are still realistic alternatives available in some market areas? As a specialist in (supermarket) franchise and market leader, Ludwig & Van Dam has extensive experience in supervising this type of process.
For more information:
Jeroen Sterk – Sterk@ludwigvandam.nl
Alex Dolphijn – dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
Ludwig & Van Dam lawyers, franchise legal advice.
Do you want to respond? Then email to sterk@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
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?
Director’s liability of a franchisee after failing to rely on an unsound prognosis.
On 11 July 2017, the Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch made a decision on whether the franchisor could successfully sue the director of a BV for non-compliance with the
Liability accountant for prepared prognosis?
In a judgment of the Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch of 11 July 2017, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2017:3153, it was discussed that franchisees accused the franchisor's accountant of being liable
How far does the bank’s duty of care extend?
Some time ago the question was raised in case law what the position of the bank is in the triangular relationship franchisor – bank – franchisee.
Burden of proof reversal in forecasting as misleading advertising?
In an interlocutory judgment of 15 June 2017, the District Court of Zeeland-West-Brabant, ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2017:3833, ruled on a claim for (among other things) suspension of the non-compete clause.