Despite the franchisee’s counterclaim, the franchisor justified dissolution of the franchise contract

Court of Rotterdam

The Rotterdam court recently ruled that payment arrears of more than € 80,000 is sufficient for the franchisor to dissolve the franchise agreement.

The overdue payment is sufficient to terminate the franchise agreement, despite the fact that the franchisee claims that the franchisor has not made any marketing efforts or provided marketing materials, even though the franchisee has paid € 400,000 for this. However, according to the court, the alleged counterclaim is not substantiated at all. Furthermore, it has not become apparent that the franchisee has given the franchisor notice of default at any time, so that there can be no question of default on the part of the franchisor and therefore no due and payable counterclaim has arisen. Suspension of payment arrears of more than € 80,000 is therefore not justified.

The Rotterdam court therefore ruled that the franchisor was right to dissolve the franchise agreement and furthermore decreed that the franchisee may no longer act as a franchisee to the outside world. Furthermore, the claim of more than €  80,000 to be paid.

For suspension by the franchisee in such a situation it is necessary that there is a well-founded substantiation, including notice of default, and not that the unsubstantiated allegation is raised in court for the first time.

Mr Th.R. Ludwig – Franchise lawyer

Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice Would you like to respond? Mail to ludwig@ludwigvandam.nl

Other messages

Late notification that no franchise agreement will be concluded

On April 11, 2017, EQLI:NL:GHARL:2017:3104, the Amsterdam-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal not only assessed the question of whether the negotiations on a franchise agreement to be concluded

Want to get rid of your franchise agreement in the meantime?

Franchise agreements are usually concluded for a longer period of time. How do you break open a franchise agreement?

HEMA in conflict with franchisees about e-commerce agreements

On 18 July 2018, the District Court of Amsterdam, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2018:5098, rendered a judgment in proceedings on the merits in which the franchisees were largely ruled in favor of e-commerce.

Franchisor prohibits opening (franchise) company

A franchisor applied for interim measures to prohibit a franchisee from opening a franchisee's business.

Go to Top