Supreme Court confirms permit sale of franchisee outside exclusive district
High Council
Franchisee acquires and sells outside its territory, in territories not yet issued to other franchisees. Franchisor objects to this state of affairs and requests them to stop this subject to dissolution of the franchise agreement. The parties will make further agreements on how to deal with the problem. Ultimately, this results in a conflict in which the franchisor dissolves the franchise contract out of court. During a court hearing, both the franchisor and the franchisee argued that the franchisee was allowed to work in territories that had not yet been assigned to anyone. In the end, the franchisor’s argument that the franchisee was not allowed to do this does not hold up either in court or in the highest instance, i.e. the Supreme Court.
NB: Franchisor and franchisee need not even have agreed that the franchisee was allowed to operate in territories that had not yet been allocated, unless otherwise agreed in this context. On competition law grounds, a franchisee is always permitted to do this and in principle a franchisee may not be restricted in this, unless a nuanced arrangement, for example reserving the areas for the franchisor itself, has been agreed between the franchisor and the franchisee.
Mr Th.R. Ludwig – Franchise lawyer Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice Would you like to respond? Mail to ludwig@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.