Franchise Definition

Case studies

"Although cost was an important factor, our relationship with ��Ӱ��, their responsiveness, flexibility, and the integration available with other products were key factors."

Irwin Mitchell

Access all documents on Franchise

GET ACCESS NOW

GLOSSARY

Published by a ��Ӱ�� Property expert

What does Franchise mean?

A royal privilege or branch of the royal prerogative subsisting in the hands of a subject, by grant from the Crown.

A franchise is registrable with its own title under the Land Registration Act 2002, s 3(1)(c). The most important rights of franchise are markets, fairs and wreck.

Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

Legal risk management checklist—in-house legal team

Legal risk management checklist—in-house legal team Legal operations risks This section covers risks arising out of the operation of the legal department. People and skills Action point Comments (if any) ☐ Document the management structure of the legal team, eg by means of a role profile for each team member setting out:—reporting lines—responsibilities of individuals (Insert any comments) ☐ Map the legal team’s skills to the needs of the organisation:—consider what key projects and day-to-day issues the organisation will need legal support on in the next 12 months—identify the skills required to meet those needs—identify the services the legal department wishes to offer—identify the client groups to be served within the organisation—specify the way in which services will be delivered—determine what reports are required by the business, the purpose of such reports, their frequency and to whom they are to be delivered (Insert any comments) ☐ Check the organisation’s processes and make suitable arrangements to reflect the needs of the legal department in respect of:—the identification and provision of...

Checklist: British Property Federation engagement protocol and red flags for company voluntary arrangements

Checklist: British Property Federation engagement protocol and red flags for company voluntary arrangements The British Property Federation (BPF) is an industry group for the UK real estate industry and strongly encourages prospective proposers of a company voluntary arrangement (CVA) and their nominees to consult with the BPF in advance of a CVA proposal being distributed. This allows representatives of the landlord community to identify particular issues within a CVA that may need to be addressed, and therefore helps to maximise the likelihood of approval. This engagement should (say the BPF) be in addition to—and not a substitute for—engagement with individual landlords (or groups of them) in relation to matters specific to them. The BPF protocol includes a statement of best-practice, which details how they expect companies to engage with the BPF on potential CVAs. Part of this guidance is a list of what the BPF believes to be the top 10 ‘red-flag’ clauses for landlords. The BPF cautions any prospective landlord voting on a proposed CVA to look out for...

Discover our 3 Checklists on Franchise

The franchise agreement

This Practice Note considers the principal matters a franchise agreement should address including clarity over the rights to be granted to the franchisee and the relevant territory, whether the franchise can be granted on an exclusive basis, ensuring full consideration is given to the sales targets and development plans, the licensing of intellectual property rights and availability of trade names and domain names. The Practice Note also highlights the importance of a well drafted manual and the key areas a manual should cover.The structure and content of a franchise agreement are similar to those of a distribution (reseller) agreement although there is a much greater focus on how the franchise is operated to ensure uniformity and consistency. The principal matters a franchise agreement should address are set out below.Grant of rightsThe rights to be granted to the franchisee should be clearly set out in the agreement; each party should be clear what it hopes to achieve. How far these, as the other terms of the agreement, can be negotiated by...

Restrictions on competing with the franchise

GeneralThis Practice Note sets out the restrictions that a franchisor typically imposes on a franchisee in order to protect the franchisor’s business, including use of the franchisor’s confidential information, obligations not to compete with the franchisor’s business (restrictive covenants), no poaching provisions, severability and enforceability of restraints, and practical guidance on drafting restrictive covenants. It does not specifically consider competition law issues—see the Practice Notes referred to below for further information in that respect.The grant of franchises will typically involve a franchisor disclosing confidential information to:•actual and prospective franchisees (including unit franchisees, master franchisees and developers), and•employees and agents of the franchiseesSuch confidential information will include the method underlying the franchised concept and related know-how, etc. Misuse by a recipient, particularly in competition with the franchisor, could be very damaging to the franchisor’s business.The franchisor must, therefore, try to prevent recipients of such information from disclosing it for unauthorised purposes, including using it to compete with the franchisor’s business. Such restrictions must apply to franchisees and their employees during and...

Discover our 19 Practice Notes on Franchise

Letter of waiver—franchisee to franchisor

Letter of waiver—franchisee to franchisor [insert name of Franchisor] [insert Franchisor’s address] Dear [insert Franchisor name], Proposed franchise agreement to be entered into between [insert name of franchisor] and [insert name of franchisee] (the ‘Agreement’) The Franchisee confirms that notwithstanding clause [Acknowledgement clause where Franchisor advises Franchisee to seek advice] of the Agreement, it has chosen not to obtain legal advice on the terms of this Agreement. It acknowledges and agrees that it shall be solely responsible for all consequences arising out of or connected with such decision. The Franchisee further confirms that: • it has read, understood, had an opportunity to discuss and has agreed to each provision of the Agreement and in particular [insert cross reference to the restrictive covenants and other onerous clauses]; • it fully understands the effects of and

New to role—in-house lawyers—meeting agenda and question plan—heads of function

New to role—in-house lawyers—meeting agenda and question plan—heads of function General Purpose of meeting Introductory meeting between [Insert your name], [insert your job title] and [insert name of head of function], head of [insert department] of [Insert name of organisation] Date and time of meeting [Insert date] at [insert time of meeting] [am OR pm] Attendees [Insert name of head of function][Insert your name][[Insert names of any other invited attendees, eg your line manager]] Agenda Item Supporting documentation Person leading item Questions Introducing [insert name of organisation]’s in-house lawyer. N/A [Insert your initials] Explain to the head of function, briefly, who you are, where you were before, why you have joined this organisation. Team structure Copies of:—departmental structure chart;—changes in structure in the last year/anticipated changes in the next six months;—outsourcing agreements. [Insert head of function’s initials] How is the head of function’s team structured? Ask for a structure chart.What changes have been made to the teams over the past year? Is any change or restructuring anticipated...

Dive into our 4 Precedents related to Franchise

ASA rulings—30 April 2025

A complaint against Groupon International Ltd and Jaoyeh Trading Ltd regarding misleading price claims was considered by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). The ASA upheld the complaint.

Is intoxication a relevant characteristic of the average consumer in trade mark claims? (Morley’s v Nanthakumar)

IP analysis: The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal of the IPEC’s finding that Nanthakumar and the seven other defendants (together, the ‘Defendants’) had infringed the registered trade marks of Morley’s (Fast Foods) Ltd (‘Morley’s’). The Court of Appeal confirmed that while the first instance judge was wrong to split the average consumer into subsets in the way she did and to consider the likelihood of confusion from the perspective of an intoxicated consumer, her overall conclusion as to the likelihood of confusion was correct. The Court of Appeal upheld her findings that the Defendants had infringed Morley’s registered trade marks pursuant to section 10(1) and 10(2)(b) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 (TMA 1994). Written by Nicole Bollard, barrister at 3PB Barristers.

Read the latest 4 News articles on Franchise

Top

Trial

��Ӱ��

GLOSSARY