Proven formula for success – a sequel
Unfortunately, in recent months it has become increasingly common for franchisees to run into problems as a result of, in short, a franchise formula that looked good on paper, but turned out not to work in practice. This often concerns small franchise organizations in the start-up phase, usually already in the first year of their existence. The cause of the problems can often be found in the fact that the franchisor in question has either just started in the sector or has been working in it for some time, but has no experience with franchising. Through their own entrepreneurship, and perhaps a dose of luck, the involved franchisor manages to set up and maintain his own company, but the franchisees are often confronted with a concept that does not work at all linked to their person. This translates into virtually no turnover and substantial losses.
The European Code of Honor on Franchising, a code of conduct to which all franchisors affiliated with the Dutch Franchise Association must adhere, but of which it is highly recommended that non-members also follow the instructions therein, stipulates that before a concept or formula is is offered to franchisees through franchise agreements, there must be a proven formula for success, and therefore a track record. That track record can be achieved, for example, by operating a pilot store for a longer period of time, a pilot project as it were, which can be used to determine whether the concept can actually function, independently of the person of the franchisor. In that case there can be a proven formula for success and only then can setbacks as referred to above, often with very far-reaching negative consequences for the franchisees, but also for the franchisor, be prevented.
Ludwig & Van Dam franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice

Other messages
Column Franchise+ – mr. J. Sterk – “Franchisee does body check better than franchise check”
A gym embarks on a franchise concept that offers “Body Checks” and discounts to (potential) members in collaboration with health insurers.
Seminar Mrs. J. Sterk and M. Munnik – Thursday, November 2, 2017: “Important legal developments for franchisors”
Attorneys Jeroen Sterk and Maaike Munnik of Ludwig & Van Dam Advocaten will update you on the status of and developments surrounding the Dutch Franchise Code and the Acquisition Fraude Act.
Goodwill at end of franchise agreement
In a case before the Amsterdam Court of Appeal on 26 September 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:3900 (Seal & Go), a franchisee claimed compensation for goodwill (ex Article 7:308 of the Dutch Civil Code) after the
Article in Entrance: “Resignation”
Fire an employee who is not performing well? The subdistrict court is strict. If you, as an employer, cannot demonstrate that you have done everything yourself to make the person function better, it will be
Cost price that is too high as a hidden franchise fee
An interlocutory judgment of the District Court of The Hague dated 30 August 2017, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2017:10597 (Happy Nurse) shows that the court has considered the question whether the
Supermarket letter – 19
Coop liability for damages due to non-performance towards the franchisee



