Franchise Board Rules
In practice, various forms of consultation circulate between franchisor and franchisee. This consultation is often structured in the form of accompanying regulations. We know these regulations in many shapes and sizes.
Good Franchise Council regulations are characterized by the possibility of allowing proportional and possibly regional representation to participate in the Franchise Council. Ideally, these members of the franchise council can be nominated or elected by their own supporters. However, it is certain to set up exaggerated regulations too elaborately. Good Franchise Council regulations are no more than a vehicle for the proper functioning of the Franchise Council. Franchise council regulations that are overly enthusiastic must be prevented from ending up in endless meeting sessions, both nationally and regionally. The question arises who benefits from this. The authority of the council itself is also central to various franchise regulations. Does the franchise council have advisory powers or can it actually force decisions by means of far-reaching control or, for example, a right of veto?
Linked to this is also the principle of the representative authority of the franchise council for the benefit of all franchisees. In practice, there is still the idea that the franchise council can simply bind the supporters. However, without very explicitly defined powers of the individual franchisee with regard to this power, this is by no means the case. When a franchisor makes agreements with the franchise council regarding a restyling, the individual franchisee is therefore not bound by this, unless this has been expressly agreed between the franchise council and the franchisee. Franchise rules don’t have to be too complicated. The regulations are short, practical and unambiguous. Composition and authority are easy to formulate. In any case, it must be prevented that the regulations are a prelude to Polish country days and thus completely overshoot their goal. The same also applies to the functioning of the franchise council itself.
Ludwig & Van Dam franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice
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.