Interests Association of Franchisees of the Netherlands (BVFN) is in further consultation with the Minister
Franchise, Franchisees, Collective, Collectives, Franchise Association, Franchising, Franchise Collectives, Franchise Board
On April 16, 2014, the previously announced meeting between the Belangen Vereniging Franchisenemers Nederland (BVFN), the independent advocacy organization for franchisees in the Netherlands, and the Ministry of Economic Affairs took place. Various topical themes concerning franchising have passed in review. Among other things, various conflicts in the franchise industry and whether legislation could be a solution for this were discussed in detail. The need for better structured information on the phenomenon of franchising was also discussed, including for starting franchisees. The BVFN will play an important role in this.
The BVFN and the Ministry will continue to talk to each other. The BVFN will be listed as a discussion partner on the website of the Ministry. The BVFN will continue intensively, also in its contacts with the government, the interests of to represent and bring attention to franchisees in the Netherlands.
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?