Nice weather as an excuse?
Legal discussions are regularly held about the question of whether disappointing visitor numbers in a (new) shopping center can be blamed on the lessor. Recently some statements have been made in this regard. These statements are important because estimates of visitor numbers may form part of forecasts as made available to the franchisee by the franchisor. The culpability can therefore extend to the franchisor and is therefore not limited to the operator of the shopping centre.
Whether disappointing visitor numbers in a (new) shopping center can be blamed depends very much on the facts and circumstances of the case. In concrete terms, this means that the lessor and/or the franchisor may indeed be liable if the figures presented turned out to be unrealistic afterwards.
An independent research obligation of the prospective tenant/franchisee is of course important in this respect. As a professional counterparty, the necessary may be expected of him in this regard. However, if a shopping center provides very clear figures that are also decisive for entering into the final rental agreement, then this can indeed be decisive. It is also important to check to what extent the data of the shopping center has been taken into account in the final forecast and to what extent these data are decisive for any deviations found. In this context, a professional attitude from the franchisor may be expected. Generalities such as economic malaise or a buyers’ strike because of the warm weather are therefore not valid.
Ludwig & Van Dam franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice
Other messages
Bankrupt because the franchisor refused to sell the franchise company – dated January 28, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The District Court of The Hague has dealt with a request from a franchisor to declare a franchisee bankrupt.
Prescribed shop fitting – dated January 28, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Midden-Nederland District Court has ruled on whether a franchisee is obliged to carry the shop fittings prescribed by the franchisor.
Ludwig & Van Dam attorneys summon Sandd and PostNL on behalf of the Sandd franchisees – dated 9 January 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Association of Franchisees of Sandd (VFS) has today summoned Sandd and PostNL before the court in Arnhem. The VFS believes that Sandd and PostNL are letting the franchisees down hard.
Article The National Franchise Guide: “Why joint and several liability, for example, next to private?” – dated 7 January 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
Franchisees are often asked to co-sign the franchise agreement in addition to their franchise, for example. Sometimes franchisees refuse to do so and the franchise agreement is not signed.
Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten assists Sandd franchisees: Franchisees Sandd challenge postal monopoly in court – dated 12 November 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Association of Franchisees of Sandd (VFS) is challenging the decision of State Secretary Mona Keijzer to approve the postal merger between PostNL and Sandd before the court in Rotterdam.
Franchisee trapped by non-compete clause? – dated October 21, 2019 – mr. AW Dolphin
The District Court of East Brabant has ruled that a franchisee was still bound by the non-competition clause in the event of premature termination of the franchise agreement.