Acquisition fraud vs. error in franchise forecasting
Who has to prove that the franchisor’s forecast is unsound? In principle, this is the franchisee. If the franchisee invokes the Acquisition Fraud Act, the burden of proof may be reversed. In that case, the franchisor, and therefore not the franchisee, will have to prove that the prognosis issued was not misleading.
The Amsterdam Court of Appeal ruled that the reversal of the burden of proof under the Acquisition Fraude Act does not also apply to an appeal by the franchisee on the basis of error. See Amsterdam Court of Appeal 16 January 2018, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2018:123. In the first instance, the franchisee had only invoked error to no avail. See District Court of Noord-Holland 27 February 2017, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2017:1590.
If there is a mistake, there does not have to be an unlawful act on the part of the franchisor. In error, the franchisee claims that he entered into the franchise agreement in the event of a misrepresentation. It is important that the franchisor is involved in the occurrence of that mistake or misunderstanding. A wrongful act occurs when an error has been committed. Acting by the franchisor in violation of the Acquisition Fraud Act constitutes an unlawful act.
A franchisee who believes that the prognosis presented is unsound, should think carefully about how to approach this.
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
mr. Th.R. Ludwig teaches a master class franchise course for NFV on September 16, 2014
On September 16, Mr. Ludwig discuss various legal aspects involved in franchise relationships during a course organized by the NFV.
Formido franchisee stumbles over burden of proof in prognosis case
Formido franchisee stumbles over burden of proof in prognosis case
Is the end of the lack of evidence in prognosis cases in sight?
For many years, the franchise agreement has been, as it is called, an unnamed agreement.
Ex-Franchisee sentenced to rectification at EenVandaag after unacceptable statements
Very recently, the President has ruled in interlocutory proceedings that the franchisee has made statements, the correctness of which has not been established.
Jumbo’s refusal to convert C1000 is definitely subject to appeal
A sad outcome for a C1000 franchisee, of which the preliminary relief judge of the court in Amsterdam
Jumbo refuses to convert C1000 and claims the franchise company
An apparently remarkable outcome about a C1000 franchisee, of which the preliminary relief judge of the court in Amsterdam