The limitation of a non-competition clause
Court of Almelo, preliminary relief judge
A former franchisee has a non-compete clause in his franchise agreement, which prohibits him from entering into a partnership with a party competing with the franchisor during and for two years after the termination of the franchise agreement. Apparently, the ex-franchisee intends to become an employee of such a competitor, because he asks the court to prohibit the franchisor from implementing the non-compete clause. The court takes a very formal approach and states that, partly in view of the termination of the franchise agreement, only the former franchisee can (still) implement the non-compete clause. In the opinion of the court, imposing an injunction on the franchisor is therefore not appropriate.
Mr JH Kolenbrander – Franchise lawyer
Ludwig & Van Dam Franchise attorneys, franchise legal advice Would you like to respond? Mail to coalbrander@ludwigvandam.nl
Other messages
Franchisor fails by invoking a non-compete clause
Although a non-compete clause is validly formulated in a franchise agreement, a situation may arise that is so diffuse that the franchisor cannot invoke it.
Acquisitions and Franchise Interest
It will not have escaped anyone's attention, certainly in the last year it can only be concluded that the Dutch economy is once again on the rise.
Which court for a rental and franchise agreement?
Which court is competent to rule on a related rental and franchise agreement?
Interview Franchise+ – mrs. J. Sterk and AW Dolphijn – “Reversal burden of proof in forecasts honored by court”
The new Acquisition Fraud Act indeed appears to be relevant for the franchise industry, according to this article from Franchise+.
Franchisor convicted under the Acquisition Fraud Act
For the first time, a court has ruled, with reference to the Acquisition Fraud Act, that if a franchisee claims that the franchisor has presented an unsatisfactory prognosis
Agreements Related to the Franchise Agreement
On 31 October 2017, the Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal issued similar judgments for nineteen franchisees (ECLI:NL:GHARL:2017:9453 through ECLI:NL:GHARL:2017:9472).