« Telstra v Minister for Communications: internal Telstra legal advice not privileged | Main | Demutualisation of building societies and financial mutuals in UK »

What is a franchise agreement?

If a contractual arrangement is a franchise agreement then the Franchising Code of Conduct (pdf) (including the obligation to provide disclosure documents) applies.

In ACCC v Kyloe Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 1522 the Federal Court rejected the ACCC's claim that the sub-distributorship agreements for the Polar Krush Ice drink business were really a franchise.

The Code defines a franchise agreement as:

... an agreement:

(a) that takes the form, in whole or part, of any of the following:

(i) a written agreement;

(ii) an oral agreement;

(iii) an implied agreement; and

(b) in which a person (the franchisor) grants to another person (the franchisee) the right to carry on the business of offering, supplying or distributing goods or services in Australia under a system or marketing plan substantially determined, controlled or suggested by the franchisor or an associate of the franchisor; and

(c) under which the operation of the business will be substantially or materially associated with a trade mark, advertising or a commercial symbol;

(i) owned, used or licensed by the franchisor or an associate of the franchisor; or

(ii) specified by the franchisor or an associate of the franchisor; and

(d) under which, before starting business or continuing the business, the franchisee must pay or agree to pay to the franchisor or an associate of the franchisor an amount including, for example:

(i) an initial capital investment fee;

(ii) a payment for goods or services;

(iii) a fee based on a percentage of gross or net income whether or not called a royalty or franchise service fee; or

(iv) a training fee or training school fee;

but excluding:

(v) payment for goods or services at or below their wholesale price; or

(vi) repayment by the franchisee of a loan from the franchisor; or

(vii) payment for the whole sale price of goods taken on consignment; or

(viii) payment of market value for purchase or lease of real property, fixtures, equipment or supplies needed to start business or to continue business under the franchise agreement."

After looking at the contractual arrangements in this case, Judge Tracey decided that Clause 4(1)(b), which requires that any right conferred by a franchisor to carry on business must be granted under a system or marketing plan, had not been satisfied.

He noted that "The phrase a "system or marketing plan" is not defined in the Code. In seeking to give meaning to this concept Australian courts have had resort to American case law which deals with equivalent but not identical legislation."

October 21, 2007 in Business Planning, Trade Practices | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/21014/22619016

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference What is a franchise agreement?:

Comments

interesting reading your report on the ACCC V KYLOE PTY / POLAR KRUSH case. I am one of the 70 or so ' distributors ' around the country that has been severely fleeced by Kyloe / Polar Krush / Impact Design. We are now in debt to the tune of around $350,000 and may be in danger of losing our home because of our investment into what we thought was a solid business venture backed by the parent company - a supposedly reputable, tried & tested company, that had been in business for a number of years, with all the systems in place.

Unfortunately, what the Judge has NOT taken into account, is that : irrespective of wether it is proved to be a Franchise or Distributorship, the FACTs are that
we were all supplied with TOTALLY FALSE (supposedly) UP-TO DATE, EARNINGS INFORMATION - in writing- that had been deliberately falsified with the sole intention of deceiving poor innocent business people into buying into the Polar Krush business ! This ' Earnings Information for Distributors ' given to us in writing when Polar Krush were advertising for " Enthusiastic & Motivated people to become part of this success - who want to build a highly successful business " & "The biggest selling ice drink in the UK that has now become the fastest growing ice drink in Australia, "etc etc.

Please note : They were NOT :~ forecasts of earnings or estimated earnings or possible earnings - they were detailed to us as:
" We can now supply you with up to date figures which show what Polar Krush Distributors are earning from different sites ".

The Judge was also incorrect in stating that no FEES were paid which were deemed to show it as a Franchise , as in all of our (written) Agreements it is stated that we have to pay an " ONGOING MACHINE FEE " or as Polar Krush themselves wrote : " Its like a Royalty fee, which lasts for the life of the machines "!

This "ONGOING MACHINE FEE" WAS ENFORCED , and PAID , as I have the copy of the invoice issued by them on 2nd Feb. 2004, for $1650.00.

FRANCHISE FEES WERE also paid, as they were incorporated into the initial purchase price of the machines, AND they were incorporated into our buying prices of concentrates, cups, straws and even promotional literature we had to buy from them.
( Something else the Judge seems to have overlooked or not addressed correctly! )

It will be a travesty of justice if this decision is allowed to stand, - and has massive implications for the whole of Australian Business in general, as it opens the back door to any and all unscrupulous foreign companies that want to rip off the Australian people !


Yours sincerely,

Wayne & Carol Styles
Hello all,

I have been following the action the ACCC pursued against Polar Krush Australia/Kyloe & Impact Designs.

As an unfortunate PK ‘distributor’ myself I was quite dismayed to see that the decision to prosecute these unscrupulous businesses did not go in our favour. I was one of the early QLD ‘distributors’ (franchises) who was lured by ludicrously inflated promises of earnings and what at the time was described as a small insignificant machine fee of $125 per machine, which we paid and it ended up being more than all the profit first the period in which it was payable!

I know I will never recover the money I invested in this fraud; however I believe it is of the utmost importance for these people to be prosecuted. We cannot let people circumvent the law by calling a spade a spoon and deal in unscrupulous business practices and get away with it!


I hope very much that the ACCC will appeal the decision. Please do not hesitate to call me if you require any information.

Thanks and regards,

Alan Wells

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Alan Wells
IT Manager

Phone: +617 3373 5926

Mobile: 0414920461

Email: a.wells@staidan.qld.edu.au

Posted by: Wayne Styles | Nov 8, 2007 8:38:26 PM

Post a comment