Recommendations by the franchisor in general terms are permitted – dated March 6, 2020 – mr. AW Dolphin
The Amsterdam Court of Appeal ruled on January 21, 2020,
ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2020:116, which is the information provided by a franchisor
about increasing turnover, cost savings, more clientele and customer loyalty
is too general in nature to invoke acquisition fraud or error
make it succeed. There is no question of deception by the franchisor and the
The (prospective) franchisee cannot be blamed by the franchisor for this
wrong leg.
In that context, it has also been ruled that a potential franchisee is allowed
be expected to know that the franchise formula is focused on business
as revenue increase and cost savings, but that concrete results of
depend on many circumstances, such as, for example, the manner
on which the franchisee conducts his business.
It is true that, if the franchisor has concrete information about
turnover forecasts and the like, he acts unlawfully if he does so
information is incorrect and he knows this, or his carelessness leads to
which led to errors. The court refers to the judgment
HR 24-02-2017, ECLI:NL:HR:2017:311 regarding Street One. In this case it is
however, such concrete information is not provided by the franchisor
provided. That is also stated in the agreement in so many words, it said
court of justice.
The boundary between praise in general terms and
on the other hand, culpable deception and misrepresentation,
remains a tricky issue.
mr. AW Dolphijn – franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Want
you respond?
Go to dolphijn@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Does a franchisee have to accept a new model franchise agreement?
On 31 March 2017, the District Court of Rotterdam, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2017:2457, ruled in interlocutory proceedings on the question whether franchisor Bram Ladage had complied with the franchise agreement with its franchisee.
Mandatory (market-based) purchase prices for franchisees
To what extent can a franchisor change agreements about the (market) purchase prices of the goods that the franchisees are obliged to purchase?
Director’s liability of a franchisee after failing to rely on an unsound prognosis.
On 11 July 2017, the Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch made a decision on whether the franchisor could successfully sue the director of a BV for non-compliance with the
Liability accountant for prepared prognosis?
In a judgment of the Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch of 11 July 2017, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2017:3153, it was discussed that franchisees accused the franchisor's accountant of being liable
How far does the bank’s duty of care extend?
Some time ago the question was raised in case law what the position of the bank is in the triangular relationship franchisor – bank – franchisee.
Burden of proof reversal in forecasting as misleading advertising?
In an interlocutory judgment of 15 June 2017, the District Court of Zeeland-West-Brabant, ECLI:NL:RBZWB:2017:3833, ruled on a claim for (among other things) suspension of the non-compete clause.