Franchising course for Netlaw

By Published On: 15-01-2011Categories: Statements & current affairs

Franchising course for Netlaw

On February 2, 2011 , Mr. Th.R. Ludwig a course for Netlaw, a partnership of various law firms in the Netherlands. The following topics will be discussed during the course: pre-contractual phase – forecasts – franchisor’s duty of care – code of honor – regulations under development.

Exclusive areas – active and passive franchisee sales opportunities – regulations regarding recommended prices / maximum prices – non-compete clauses – non-solicitation clauses.

Dispute settlements – arbitration clauses – mediation – binding advice.

Confluence of various legal areas, including agency, wft et cetera.

The course is held in Utrecht and is open to all attorneys affiliated with Netlaw.

 

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

Franchisor fails by invoking a non-compete clause

Although a non-compete clause is validly formulated in a franchise agreement, a situation may arise that is so diffuse that the franchisor cannot invoke it.

Acquisitions and Franchise Interest

It will not have escaped anyone's attention, certainly in the last year it can only be concluded that the Dutch economy is once again on the rise.

Interview Franchise+ – mrs. J. Sterk and AW Dolphijn – “Reversal burden of proof in forecasts honored by court”

The new Acquisition Fraud Act indeed appears to be relevant for the franchise industry, according to this article from Franchise+.

By Ludwig en van Dam|20-12-2017|Categories: Dispute settlement, Forecasting issues, Franchise Agreements, Statements & current affairs|Tags: , , |

Franchisor convicted under the Acquisition Fraud Act

For the first time, a court has ruled, with reference to the Acquisition Fraud Act, that if a franchisee claims that the franchisor has presented an unsatisfactory prognosis

Agreements Related to the Franchise Agreement

On 31 October 2017, the Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal issued similar judgments for nineteen franchisees (ECLI:NL:GHARL:2017:9453 through ECLI:NL:GHARL:2017:9472).

Go to Top