In a recent Court of Appeal case, a landlord was unsuccessful in its appeal against a first-instance decision that a 'non-reliance' clause in a lease had attempted to exclude liability for misrepresentation. The decision, which will have ramifications for franchise agreements, demonstrates that such clauses must be fair and reasonable and have regard to the circumstances which were or ought reasonably to have been known to or contemplated by the parties when the contract was made.
The recent KFC chicken supply crisis highlights the importance of supply chain management and illustrates how parties that rely on the functioning of a supply chain must protect themselves from a contractual and legal perspective. It also offers franchise businesses an opportunity to review the management and procurement of their supply chains, as well as the terms which govern their upstream relationships with third-party manufacturers and suppliers and their downstream relationships with franchisees.
The European Franchise Federation (EFF) recently adopted a new version of the European Code of Ethics for Franchising. The updated code aims to address some of the perceived imbalances and inequities in the franchise relationship and bring self-regulation into the digital age. However, although the British Franchise Association's (BFA's) interpretation of the code may include some variations from the EFF's text, much of the BFA's existing code and its practices are already in line with these updates.
Recent events have given the first real insight into the Brexit process. Franchise businesses should start preparing for the potential impact of Brexit by auditing their IP rights in the European Union and assessing their key contractual relationships with suppliers and franchisees. Preparations for the General Data Protection Regulation should continue and a watchful eye should be kept on events as they unfold.
The High Court recently considered whether two restrictive covenants relating to non-solicitation and non-competition imposed by an individual seller of a hair salon franchise in a share purchase agreement were enforceable. The judgment serves as a useful and informative discussion on a number of legal principles, such as contractual interpretation, restraint of trade and the enforceability of restrictive covenants.
In a recent landmark decision, the Supreme Court considered the long-established principles underlying the law relating to contractual penalty clauses. The judgment sets out a new, progressive test for determining whether a contractual provision will be considered penal (and therefore unenforceable), and has major implications for drafting, negotiating and enforcing English law franchise agreements.