Franchisor liable for errors made by a franchisee? – mr. AW Dolphijn – dated November 23, 2020
A franchise organization of mortgage brokers requested the court to declare that the franchisor is not liable for the fact that a franchisee has committed a serious error, or at least committed fraud with a customer. The District Court of Amsterdam ruled in this case on November 4, 2020, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2020:5408.
Mortgage brokers are supervised by the AFM and require a licence. The franchisor is the central license holder in this matter and has a collective license (Section 2:105 Wft). The individual franchisees then act under the responsibility of the franchisor. However, the franchisor stated that this does not mean that the franchisor is then in all cases liable for errors made by the franchisee.
The court rules that the franchisor can be liable, in addition to the franchisee, for an error on the part of the franchisee if that error is caused by the affiliated company not complying with the aforementioned licensing obligations and requirements. For example, if a franchisee does not comply with the licensing requirements and third parties suffer damage as a result, this can lead to liability of the franchisor towards that third party.
In this case, the franchisor’s claim to establish that the franchisor was not liable was formulated too broadly.
This ruling provides more guidance on the extent to which a franchisor under a collective license could be liable for errors and fraud by franchisees.
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
Fine for franchisor because aspiring franchisee is foreigner
On 5 July 2017, the Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2017:1815, decided whether, in the case of (proposed) cooperation between a franchisor and a prospective franchisee, the franchisor
Article in Entrance: “Company name”
“I came up with a wonderful name for my catering company and incurred the necessary costs for this. Now there is another entrepreneur who is going to use almost the same one. Is that allowed?"
The bank’s duty of care in franchise agreements
On 23 May 2017, the Court of Appeal in The Hague, EQLI:NL:GHDHA:2017:1368, had to rule on the question whether the bank should have warned a prospective franchisee in connection with the
Article in Entrance: “Standing up”
“Can I fire an employee with immediate effect if he steals something trivial, such as food that has passed its expiration date?”
Arbitration clause in franchise agreement sometimes inconvenient
On 20 July 2016, the District Court of Gelderland, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2016:4868, ruled on the validity of an agreement in a franchise agreement, whereby disputes would be settled
Supermarket letter – 18
Can an entrepreneur be obliged to operate a different supermarket formula?





