Non-compete clause on the sale of a franchise business
How strict should a non-compete clause be when selling a franchise business to the franchisor? That question was raised in a dispute in which the District Court of Gelderland ruled on 6 September 2017, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2017:68800.
It can be concluded from the published ruling that a franchisee sold the Douglas company back to franchisor Douglas at some point. Apparently part of that sale was that the former franchisee could continue to operate a business at the same address, but that no business could be run there to sell “perfumery products” to consumers.
It also seems that the former franchisee in question has joined another franchise organization that developed the franchise formula for the purpose of operating a beauty salon. After hearing various witnesses, the court considers that, after the sale of the company to Douglas, products were only sold from the business premises to people who have undergone a treatment in the beauty salon and who are (therefore) in the customer base, because there are occasionally products were sold without also undergoing a beauty treatment or there was registration in the customer base or an exceptional situation was involved. The sale of the products was thus subject to significant restrictions, with the emphasis of the exploitation being on the beauty treatments and not on the sale of products. Furthermore, it has not yet emerged that there is any question of the sale of the prohibited “perfumery products”. The products that were sold also included bracelets and wallets. The relationship between the beauty treatment and the products offered for sale should be seen in a broad sense and, in addition to perfume, also included some make-up products, etc., which customers could use during and after the treatment in the beauty salon. The court therefore rules that the non-compete clause has not been violated.
It sometimes proves difficult to describe exactly in a non-compete clause which activities can and cannot be regarded as competitive. A franchisee who wants to switch to a different formula, which could somewhat resemble the formula that is currently being operated, would do well to open up his cards in advance.
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
Core obligations in the franchise relationship II
This is the second article in a short series on some core obligations in the relationship between franchisor and franchisee and how to handle them.
Core obligations in the franchise relationship
This is the first article in a short series on some core obligations in the relationship between franchisor and franchisee and how to deal with them.
Franchise Law
Franchise Law
Reducing the risk of fictitious employment
Recently, the new Minister of Social Affairs, De Geus, made the choice that he wants to put an end once and for all to the discussion whether there is self-employment or a
Bound by non-compete clause after expiration of the
The vast majority of franchise agreements contain a so-called post-contractual non-compete clause (hereinafter referred to as “non-competition clause” for brevity).
Severance schemes in the event of (premature) termination of the
Retirement schemes Franchise agreements and comparable cooperation agreements regularly include a regulation to the effect that the rights under that agreement