Article Franchise+: “With our franchise formula you will earn mountains of gold.” dated 10 July 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
For example, the Amsterdam District Court ruled that a franchisor merely praised the franchise formula in general terms by stating that a certain average turnover is achieved by the franchisees. The fact that this average turnover is not achieved by a particular franchisee does not mean that the franchisor should not have made the announcement. Also, in another case, it was held that there were only general promotions with the statement that the franchise formula was “the best price level!” and is able “to achieve this best price level because you benefit from international purchasing advantage because you buy from the source.”
Promotions are not always permissible. After all, advertising can go further than an endorsement and may contain information, such as omissions, that is misleading are. It will not always be obvious when there are generalized praise and the provision or withholding of inadmissible information. information on the acquisition of franchisees by franchisors. The legislator has provided more clarity about the impermissible with the introduction of the Acquisition Fraud Act. Under acquisition fraud be deceptive commercial practices involving the use of certain sales techniques aimed at gaining trust and arousing expectations in order to induce the other to enter into an agreement, whereby the consideration is not or hardly properly provided. The law Acquisition fraud explicitly refers to misleading statements such as ten regarding “statistical data”. It is also worth considering in this context historical data or forecasts. Of commendation in general terms will then not soon. With franchising in particular, the franchise formula will be promoted by the franchisor with historical data or forecasts. The the question then is whether that commendation takes place in “general terms”. The distinction between permissible promotions and misleading information remains a gray area, despite the relevant legislation. Each individual case will always have to be judged on its own.
Click here for the entire article.
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
Interests Association of Franchisees of the Netherlands (BVFN) is in further consultation with the Minister
On April 16, 2014, the previously announced meeting between the Belangen Vereniging Franchisenemers Nederland (BVFN) and the Ministry of Economic Affairs took place.
Exoneration of duty of care with the franchisor’s prognosis
In a judgment of the Overijssel court of 9 April 2014, the interesting question arose whether a collaboration should be qualified as a franchise.
Non-competition clause is lost in summary proceedings
Recently, the preliminary relief judge in Rotterdam ruled that a franchisee was not bound by the non-competition clause included in the franchise agreement.
Advance on compensation after an unsound prognosis
In a beautifully substantiated summary judgment of the Northern Netherlands Court of 9 April 2014, the question was whether an advance should be paid for the damage assessment procedure.
Collection point requires shopping destination
In my supermarket newsletter of July 11, 2013, I already predicted that the establishment of collection points for goods ordered via the internet would set the judicial pens in motion.
Developments and sales via the internet.
Developments and sales via the internet.