The Dutch Supreme Court annuls a judgment of the Court of Appeal for error in market definition and lack of analysis of the franchise agreement’s restrictive object in the light of its context (Prisma Vastgoed, Prisma Food Retail / Verweerders)

In 1989, Prisma rented out a supermarket to the defendant. The rental agreement provided for an option to purchase the supermarket in favour of the defendant, which could be exercised on 30 April 2001. This agreement further provided that in case the defendant purchased the supermarket, it would be bound by a franchise agreement with Prisma, according to which it had to respect a given supermarket formula. Moreover, it was provided that the defendant could not terminate the franchise relationship without having to offer for sale the supermarket to Prisma (hereafter the ‘obligation to offer for sale'), which, in turn, benefited from an option to purchase. This franchise agreement was concluded for a period of ten years and was

L'accès à cet article est réservé aux abonnés

Déjà abonné ? Identifiez-vous

L’accès à cet article est réservé aux abonnés.

Lire gratuitement un article

Vous pouvez lire cet article gratuitement en vous inscrivant.

 

Version PDF

Auteurs

  • European Commission - DG HR (Brussels)
  • European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)

Citation

Tristan Baumé, Sally Janssen, The Dutch Supreme Court annuls a judgment of the Court of Appeal for error in market definition and lack of analysis of the franchise agreement’s restrictive object in the light of its context (Prisma Vastgoed, Prisma Food Retail / Verweerders), 18 décembre 2009, e-Competitions December 2009, Art. N° 30711

Visites 3092

Tous les numéros

  • Latest News issue 
  • Tous les News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • Tous les Special issues