Interview Franchise+ – mrs. J. Sterk and AW Dolphijn – “Reversal of burden of proof in forecasts approved by court” – February 2018
The new Acquisition Fraud Act indeed appears to be relevant for the franchise industry, according to this article from Franchise+. Alex Dolphijn of Ludwig & Van Dam represents a franchisee in legal proceedings in which the franchisor has been convicted for the first time under the Acquisition Fraud Act. The court states that the franchisor must be able to demonstrate afterwards that the prognosis is correct. The position of franchisees has been greatly strengthened by this ruling. To be able to prove that a franchisor has its affairs in order, the franchisor must come from a good family, explain franchise attorneys Jeroen Sterk and Alex Dolphijn of Ludwig & Van Dam.
Other messages
Franchisees: do not conclude arbitration clauses, but do take out legal expenses insurance
In conflicts between franchisor and franchisee, it often happens that the parties do not fight with equal arms.
Steady line in case law will be continued!
The judgment of the Supreme Court of 25 January 2002 has already been discussed several times in this series of articles.
Side effects of non-compete clauses
Many franchise agreements contain a non-compete clause, both during the term
Non-competition clause
Franchise agreements often include a non-compete clause
To rule is to look into the future
Supply and demand. Concepts that dominate the entire commercial world.
For clarity
The last period shows that discussions regarding goodwill payments at the end of a franchise partnership are still numerous.