Tenancy law and franchise: approval of deviating terms in the tenancy agreement, despite material infringement and the lack of an equal social position between the tenant and landlord
franchisor, franchisee, lessee
The District Court of Rotterdam recently ruled in a rental case in which the landlord, Markthal Rotterdam BV, requested approval of a number of deviating rental clauses in the rental agreement with its tenant.
A deviating clause will only be approved if the clause does not materially affect the rights that the tenant derives from Section 7.4.6 or if his position in society compared to that of the lessor is such that he does not reasonably need the protection of Section 7.4.6.
This judgment of the Rotterdam District Court can be called special because in the present case there is indeed a substantial infringement of the tenant’s rights and the lack of an equivalent social position. The decisive factor for the approval by the subdistrict court was that, despite the deviating stipulations, the rights of the tenant are still sufficiently guaranteed by the landlord, partly due to the long term of the lease, the limited investments by the tenant and the undertaking by the landlord to offer replacement business space at the end of the lease.
Franchisors/landlords regularly ask the subdistrict court for approval of deviating clauses in the lease, for example because they want to link the term of the lease to the term of the franchise agreement or the term of the main lease. The fact that there is no equal social position between the franchisor/landlord and the franchisee/lessee is undisputed and unchangeable. What a franchisor/landlord can do to obtain approval is to ensure that there are sufficient guarantees for the franchisee/lessee. Both during the term of the rental agreement and afterwards.
Mr AC van Engel – Franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice. Do you want to respond? Mail to vanengel@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Fine for franchisor because aspiring franchisee is foreigner
On 5 July 2017, the Council of State, ECLI:NL:RVS:2017:1815, decided whether, in the case of (proposed) cooperation between a franchisor and a prospective franchisee, the franchisor
Article in Entrance: “Company name”
“I came up with a wonderful name for my catering company and incurred the necessary costs for this. Now there is another entrepreneur who is going to use almost the same one. Is that allowed?"
The bank’s duty of care in franchise agreements
On 23 May 2017, the Court of Appeal in The Hague, EQLI:NL:GHDHA:2017:1368, had to rule on the question whether the bank should have warned a prospective franchisee in connection with the
Article in Entrance: “Standing up”
“Can I fire an employee with immediate effect if he steals something trivial, such as food that has passed its expiration date?”
Arbitration clause in franchise agreement sometimes inconvenient
On 20 July 2016, the District Court of Gelderland, ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2016:4868, ruled on the validity of an agreement in a franchise agreement, whereby disputes would be settled
Supermarket letter – 18
Can an entrepreneur be obliged to operate a different supermarket formula?