DFA Franchise theme meeting
Franchise theme meeting
Date : November 19, 2015
Time of day : 3:30 pm
Location : Hotel New York
Address : Koninginnenhoofd 1, 3072 AD Rotterdam
Agenda:
3:15 pm – Reception
15:30 – 16:00 – Introduction and explanation of the usefulness and necessity of and the process followed so far with regard to the consultation version of the Dutch Franchise Code (NFC), by: Derk van Dam, lawyer and partner at Ludwig & From dam
16:00 – 16:30 – The content of the NFC, by: Tessa de Mönnink, lawyer and partner at De Grave De Mönnink Spliet Advocaten
4:30 – 5:30 pm – Debate about the NFC chaired by Derk van Dam and Tessa de Mönnink, Propositions: (1) a franchise code is not necessary (2) the current NFC is unusable in practice (3) a franchise code deserves the preference over legislation (4) with the current NFC there is a danger that franchises will die out in the Netherlands (5) the interests of franchisees deserve more protection than hitherto (6) why invent the wheel yourself and not look at neighboring countries?
From 5:30 pm – Drinks
You can register via the DFA website: http://www.vereniging-dfa.nl/agenda-vereniging-dfa/?event_id=24

Other messages
Franchisor hinders litigation – An unbalanced arbitration clause
It has been agreed in a franchise agreement that disputes will be settled by arbitration, to be held in New York, in the English language.
DA Drugstore head office clashes hard with franchisees
DA Drugstore head office clashes hard with franchisees
Competing without a non-competition clause?
The franchise non-compete obligation remains a source of dispute.
Non-competition clause set aside; big consequences
Non-competition clause set aside; big consequences
Judgment association of franchisees versus franchisor regarding the roll-out of an alternative franchise formula
Judgment association of franchisees versus franchisor regarding the roll-out of an alternative franchise formula
Continuation of operation, despite substantial backlog of franchise fee?
Can the franchisee continue to operate despite a significant franchise fee payment arrears?