FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS UNDER THE LAWS OF ARUBA (II)
Case law regarding termination
It can be concluded from a Netherlands Antilles case regarding failed negotiations for the continuation of a license agreement (franchising) (Antillean Family Foods NV vs Mc Donald’s Corporation, Supreme Court, February 26, 1993, NJ 1993, 289), that under certain circumstances the termination of an agreement may constitute an obligation (to negotiate a renewal of contract or) to pay damages / compensation.
Possible areas of relevance are: the contents of the agreement and the circumstances under which the agreement was entered into; the amount invested by the franchisee and the extent to which the investment was recouped; …
Read the rest »
FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS UNDER THE LAWS OF ARUBA (I)
What are called ‘franchises’ are not seldom mixed type agreements
Franchise agreements are not defined in any Aruban statute and are not subject to any specific Aruban legislation. The franchise agreement is a sui generis agreement, subject to the general law of contracts. Distribution agreements are not subject to any specific Aruban legislation either, and are, as with franchise agreements, also subject to the general law of contracts.
In accordance with the general law of contracts, parties are free, in principle, to agree on whatever they wish. However, certain restrictions are imposed by the general principle of Aruban law that …
Read the rest »