Still deliver in case of payment arrears.
Central Netherlands Court
The Central Netherlands District Court recently ruled that even in the event of payment arrears of more than € 100,000, the franchisor could not unilaterally terminate the franchise agreement and had to deliver. The idea was that the payment arrears had existed for a long time and the franchisee had drawn the franchisor’s attention to this. Payment arrears were also tolerated for a long time and a single policy change on the part of the franchisor proved insufficient to make use of the contractually stipulated right of termination in the event of payment arrears. The court also considered that the franchisor could be expected to draw up a concrete plan for repayment of the payment arrears in consultation with the franchisee. If such consultation and such a plan are not forthcoming, a good defense can be made against the suspension of deliveries by appealing to reasonableness and fairness.
In times of crisis, the court thus puts the brakes on rash decisions to stop such deliveries. Franchisors are thus warned that the duty of care also extends to financial guidance and timely intervention if payment arrears arise.
Mr J. Sterk – Franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice Would you like to respond? Mail to info@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Infringement of non-competition clause, where is the limit?
In this matter, a former freelancer of massage parlor Doctor Feelgood started his own massage parlor under the name Feelgood-store.
Research into numbers of franchise procedures
We recently published a brief survey of franchise jurisprudence over the past six years on the website.
Violation of duty of care affects exoneration
In a dispute about an appeal to an exoneration clause in the franchise agreement by the franchisor, it was considered that the nature of the franchise agreement should be taken into account
Supermarket letter – 5
Acquisition of a supermarket location by terminating the lease at the expense of the sitting tenant is allowed by the Supreme Court.
Acquisition of a supermarket location by terminating the lease at the expense of the sitting tenant is allowed by the Supreme Court
On 25 April 2014, the Supreme Court confirmed for the second time that the waiting period of three years for termination of the rental agreement for retail space due to urgent personal use after the purchase of the property
Unauthorized unilateral collective fee increase by the franchisor
In an important decision of the Amsterdam Court of Appeal of 23 April 2014, the question was whether a franchisor was allowed to implement an increase in a contribution.