Sunday, January 28, 2018

What is the Franchising Code of Conduct?

WHAT IS THE FRANCHISING CODE OF CONDUCT?

This article was previously published on the Inside Franchise Business website.

The Franchising Code of Conduct is a mandatory industry code. It contains a process to determine what constitutes a franchise agreement, and regulates the conduct of franchisors and franchisees towards each other.

The Code has been in force since 1 October 1998 and it sits within the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. A revised version was introduced on 1 January 2015 which governs all franchise agreements entered into, renewed, extended or varied on or after that date. Some conduct under franchise agreements entered into before 1 January 2015 will continue to be governed by the former Code.

The Code can be found on the website of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).

How the Code affects you

The Code sets out obligations and procedures which must be followed and cannot be waived. Some of these include:

1. The franchisor must maintain a disclosure document in a prescribed format containing information about the franchise system. It must be updated annually and must include details about current and former franchisees, all costs you can expect to incur during the course of the franchise and any litigation that the franchisor is involved in.

2. A current disclosure document must be given to you along with a copy of the proposed franchise agreement and a copy of the Code at least 14 days before a franchise agreement is entered into.

3. You are granted a seven day cooling off period after entering into a franchise agreement, except on renewals, variations or transfers of existing franchise agreements.

4. Before entering a franchise agreement, you must give the franchisor a statement about whether or not you received legal, accounting and business advice. It is not mandatory for you to obtain this advice, but you do need to tell the franchisor if you did.

5. There are rules governing how a franchisor can operate a marketing fund. Franchisors must be transparent about what they use the fund for and provide you with annual statements.

6. Franchisors are subject to certain restrictions when requiring you to undertake significant capital expenditure (such as store and equipment upgrades).

7. Franchisors must give notice requiring breaches to be remedied and give a reasonable time (no longer than 30 days) to remedy a breach before terminating the franchise agreement. There are limited circumstances where this does not apply and the franchisor can terminate your agreement immediately, for example, if you become bankrupt, act fraudulently or endanger public health and safety.

8. There are processes to be followed for the resolution of disputes, which include mediation.

9. There is an obligation for franchisors and franchisees to act in good faith in their dealings with each other. This does not though restrict either of you from acting in your genuine commercial interests.

Why does the Code exist?

The purpose of the Code is to even-out the power imbalance which exists in a franchise relationship. Franchisors generally have the greater share of power in the relationship, so the Code places limits on this power, but at the same time ensures both franchisors and franchisees act fairly.

The Code also endeavours to ensure that you are made aware that signing up to a franchise is a significant commitment and that you are provided with the right information to make an informed decision as to whether a franchise model is the right choice for you.

Breaching the Code

The responsibility of enforcing the Code rests with the ACCC. Any breach of the Code is also a breach of the Competition and Consumer Act.

Breaches of some provisions will attract penalties of up to $63,000 in each instance, and these breaches may lead to infringement notices issued by the ACCC for $10,500 per breach.

Compliance with the Code must therefore be taken seriously by all parties to a franchise agreement.

Need advice  Talk to the Franchising team at Rouse Lawyers. Contact us today!

Monday, January 15, 2018

Why Won’t Twitter #BanTrump?

bantrumpBy Christina Krantz and David Rose

Happy new year from Rouse Lawyers! We’re less than two weeks in, and 2018 already looks a bizarre, parallel universe. The Hottest 100 has changed dates, the weather is warmer than ever, and the President of the United States is in a button-measuring contest with North Korea. Did we accidentally ingest something at the New Year’s party, or is this reality now?

President Trump’s most recent outburst has prompted some people to ask why Twitter allows him on their platform at all. Activists have targeted Twitter’s CEO, Jack Dorsey, claiming that he is “complicit” in “endanger[ing] the world”. The movement is backed by thousands of Twitter users, many of whom believe that Trump is in violation of the Twitter Rules. It seems like everybody’s asking the same question: why doesn’t Twitter just ban Donald Trump?

Money

One of the more cynical answers is that Trump is a money-maker for Twitter. It’s hard to know exactly how many people use Twitter, but estimates put the number at around 125 million. To put that in perspective, Trump’s feed alone has 46.4 million subscribers. That’s 37% of all Twitter users, without counting those of us who read his tweets in the newspaper, or on Facebook. If Twitter were to ban Trump, experts estimate they could lose up to two billion dollars. The President may be stupid, but Twitter certainly isn’t. They won’t kill their cash-cow without a good reason.

The President Can’t Break the Rules

Unfortunately for those who dislike Trump’s Twitter rants, it has emerged that he, quite literally, cannot be in breach of Twitter’s rules. Much like Trump himself, the reason for this is pretty simple: he’s a world leader. On Jan 5th, Twitter announced that they would exempt world leaders from the rules that govern their other users. Twitter’s argument is that blocking world leaders from Twitter would be damaging to global discussion. Therefore, Trump (and all other leaders) cannot be in breach of the Twitter rulebook. It’s worth noting that in the 21st century, Twitter isn’t too dissimilar from television, or newspapers. Nobody would complain about a news agency giving a platform to a Trump by printing his comments or airing them. Twitter could be said to occupy a similar space.

Could the Public Force Trump Offline?

Forcing Trump off Twitter isn’t something the public can do unless an angry mob of computer programmers storms the Twitter offices. The main reason for this is the doctrine of privity of contract. “Privity of contract” is a simple, yet powerful idea. Under this rule, only people who have signed a contract can exercise their rights under it. When the President signed up with Twitter, he didn’t make a contract with the entire world; he made a contract with Twitter. Accordingly, even if he breaks every one of Twitter’s rules, in the end, he’s only answerable to Twitter. The public simply don’t get a say in Donald Trump’s contract with Twitter.

The other reason that Trump won’t be kicked off is that Twitter has repeatedly decided to continue enforcing their contract with him. Under standard contract law, when a party breaches a contract, the contract does not cease to exist. Rather, the other party gets to decide what to do with the contract. Unless the breach is so serious that it prevents the contract being enforced at all, the other party can decide to continue enforcing the contract. Alternatively, they can decide to terminate it due to the beach.

When faced with Trump’s alleged breaches, Twitter has elected to stay silent, and allowed Donald Trump to continue using their platform. Some people would consider this a decision to continue enforcing the contract. Of course, saying nothing at all isn’t conclusive proof of anything. This isn’t a Ronan Keating song. Let’s take an Australian approach.

The Australian Approach

Under Australian law, you’re required to give objective, unequivocal words or conduct which indicate how you’re going to respond to a breach. Twitter’s World Leader policy has certainly done that, in our view. Twitter has given an unequivocal statement that Trump is welcome on their platform. From an Australian legal perspective, there’s little doubt that the contract between them is still on-foot. Accordingly, it’s likely that Twitter will allow Trump to stay for as long as he’s President.