Obligation to sell back at the end of the franchise agreement
Franchise agreements sometimes provide that the franchisee is required to sell back purchased assets at the end of the franchise agreement. What if the franchisee sold the assets to another before the end of the franchise agreement? The preliminary relief judge of the District Court of Central Netherlands ruled on this question on 29 December 2017, ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2017:6793.
Pursuant to the franchise agreement, the franchisee is obliged to purchase certain equipment for the operation of the franchise formula. The franchise agreement stipulates that the franchisee must sell the purchased equipment back to the franchisor.
The franchisee, on the other hand, argues that it sold the equipment to a third party (in good faith) which would prevent it from meeting the sell-back obligation. In that case, the former franchisee could perhaps only be ordered to pay replacement compensation in proceedings on the merits.
However, the preliminary relief judge does not believe that the former franchisee actually sold the equipment to a third party. The preliminary relief judge considers that the story of the former franchisee is implausible, partly because the sale allegedly took place to the brother of the former franchisee, the former franchisee continued to use the equipment and that the equipment was only very recently moved to the new location of the former franchisee.
The conclusion is that the former franchisee is ordered to make the equipment available to the franchisor.
mr. AW Dolphin – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Do you want to respond? Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl .
Other messages
Interests Association of Franchisees of the Netherlands (BVFN) is in further consultation with the Minister
On April 16, 2014, the previously announced meeting between the Belangen Vereniging Franchisenemers Nederland (BVFN) and the Ministry of Economic Affairs took place.
Exoneration of duty of care with the franchisor’s prognosis
In a judgment of the Overijssel court of 9 April 2014, the interesting question arose whether a collaboration should be qualified as a franchise.
Non-competition clause is lost in summary proceedings
Recently, the preliminary relief judge in Rotterdam ruled that a franchisee was not bound by the non-competition clause included in the franchise agreement.
Advance on compensation after an unsound prognosis
In a beautifully substantiated summary judgment of the Northern Netherlands Court of 9 April 2014, the question was whether an advance should be paid for the damage assessment procedure.
Collection point requires shopping destination
In my supermarket newsletter of July 11, 2013, I already predicted that the establishment of collection points for goods ordered via the internet would set the judicial pens in motion.
Developments and sales via the internet.
Developments and sales via the internet.