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
The manager (employee) who becomes a franchisee – fictitious employment?
On 14 December 2016, the subdistrict court judge of the District Court of Noord-Holland, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2016:11031 (Employee/Espresso Lounge), considered the situation in which an employee
The Supreme Court sets strict requirements for franchise forecasts
A ruling by the Supreme Court on Friday casts a new light on the provision of profit and turnover forecasts to aspiring franchisees.
Infringement of exclusive service area by franchisor in connection with formula change dated February 27, 2017
On 30 January 2017, the provisional relief judge of the District Court of Noord-Holland, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2017:688 (Intertoys/franchisee), was asked how to deal with the
Forecasts at startup franchise formula
The Amsterdam Court of Appeal ruled on 14 February 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:455 (Tot Straks/franchisee) on the question whether the franchisor had provided an unsatisfactory prognosis and whether the
Mandatory transfer of franchise business to franchisor?
On January 23, 2017, the District Court of Amsterdam, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2017:412 (CoffeeCompany/Dam Spirit BV) rendered a judgment on the question whether a franchisee upon termination of the cooperation
Transfer customer data to franchisor
In its judgment of 10 January 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:68 (OnlineAccountants.nl), the Amsterdam Court ruled, among other things, on the question of how customer data should be transferred.