Dunkin' Donuts Quebec Verdict To Be Appealed

In his ruling, Justice Daniel Tingley described the case as "a sad saga … of how a once successful franchise operation, a leader in its field — the donut/coffee fast food market in Quebec — fell from grace in less than a decade; literally a case study of how industry leaders can become followers in free market economies."

He noted the company took primary responsibility for protecting and enhancing its brand.

"It failed to do so, thereby breaching the most important obligation it had assumed in its contracts. It must accept the consequences of such a failure. … Franchisees cannot succeed where the system has failed."

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca
June 25, 2012

Dunkin' Donuts Quebec Verdict To Be Appealed
The Canadian Press

-DUNKIN-DONUTS.jpg

Dunkin' Donuts plans to appeal a Quebec Superior Court ruling that forces it to pay $16.4 million to some of its former franchisees in the province. Getty Images

MONTREAL - Dunkin' Donuts plans to appeal a Quebec Superior Court ruling that forces it to pay $16.4 million to some of its former franchisees in the province who alleged the chain cost them money through management errors.

The decision, which came down late last week, was made public on Monday.

Frederic Gilbert, one of the lawyers representing the franchisees, said the decision will have a major impact on the rights of franchisees and how their responsibilities are defined.

"This decision will become a reference tool for setting basic guidelines governing contractual relations between parties," he said in a statement.

Dunkin' Donuts, which is headquartered in Canton, Mass., plans to appeal the ruling, which came after nine years of legal proceedings.

"Dunkin' Brands strongly disagrees with the decision reached by the Court and believes the damages awarded were unwarranted," the company said in a statement.

"Dunkin' Brands is proud of its efforts to support all of its franchisees in Quebec and around the world and the company intends to vigorously appeal the decision."

The award goes to 21 franchisees that held 32 stores when the suit was launched in 2003.

In the original lawsuit, the franchisees claimed that Dunkin' Brands Canada Ltd., which was known as Allied Domecq Retailing International (Canada) Ltd. when the suit started, had made marketing, advertising and management errors that damaged the chain's brand.

The operators argued that inferior advertising campaigns had been launched by the chain in the face of competition and that it had an unsuitable product offering for the Quebec market.

They also blamed an ineffective marketing strategy and unstable administration for causing a decline that saw the number of Dunkin' Donuts outlets in Quebec drop to 115 in January 2003 from 250 in 1995.

Dunkin' Donuts responded at the time that it had invested millions of dollars to support and expand growth in the Quebec market, which has since been dominated by Tim Hortons (TSX:THI).

In his ruling, Justice Daniel Tingley described the case as "a sad saga … of how a once successful franchise operation, a leader in its field — the donut/coffee fast food market in Quebec — fell from grace in less than a decade; literally a case study of how industry leaders can become followers in free market economies."

He noted the company took primary responsibility for protecting and enhancing its brand.

"It failed to do so, thereby breaching the most important obligation it had assumed in its contracts. It must accept the consequences of such a failure. … Franchisees cannot succeed where the system has failed."

The judge rejected any idea the franchisees were poor operators and said they were active and among the most successful in the province's network of stores.

Gilbert said the determination of the franchisees played a key role in the outcome of the court case.

"They valiantly confronted the countless financial and human pressures that are often seen in battles pitting David against Goliath. Even at their weakest moment, they never gave up the fight."

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/06/25/dunkin-donuts-quebec-verdict_n_1625656.html


Brought to you by WikidFranchise.org

Risks: 1,001 ways to make your life miserable, 100 per cent of settlements have gag orders, 2 per cent of valid claims make it to Trial, Able to finance and sell negative cash flow franchise on crooked appraisals, Abusive relationships of all kinds affects people deeply, Ad hominem attack, Advertising fund buys franchisor’s assets, Advertising fund use disagreements, Award-winning franchisees, Arthur Wishart Act (Franchise Disclosure), 2000, Canada, Ban waivers of legal rights, Bandwagon effect, Blame the victim, Brand backlash: franchisees suffer because brand owners screw up, Breach of contract, Broken relationships, ruined lives and alienated children, Can’t sue, Class action lawsuits are an unproven form of remedy, Class action lawsuits benefit lawyers, not franchisees, Class action only as good as the lawyers involved, Class-action dead end, Coerced waiver of legal rights, self, Contracts seen as unenforceable or void, Court decision favorable to franchisees, David and Goliath story, Debt traps, Deceptive business practices, Externalities: cheap business decision when someone else pays, Extortion, Feudal relationships, Franchisor abandonment, Franchisor chooses to do nothing when told of investor losses, Franchisor negligent in not protecting tradename, Franchisor will appeal decision to gain time, FranWhack: a system that is not investment-worthy, Fraud, renovation, Ideas once outrageous are now considered normal, Imbalance of information and power, Incompetent or predatory: for the small business investor, the outcome is the same, Indemnification provisions, Independence, Independence: time to break the chain, Independent businesses much higher profit than franchised ones, Independent businesses survive longer than franchised ones, Individuals with a very successful career history, Ineffective marketing, Infamous trademark system, Investment made during stressful life event, Justice delayed is justice denied, Knew or could have reasonably been expected to know, Lawsuits, group, Lease controlled by franchisor, Lease margins are an important source of franchisor revenue, Lease obligations make franchisees pay even if not in business, Leasehold improvements worth next to nothing, Liar Loans, Live by the lawsuit, die by the lawsuit, Loan repudiation, Loan-broker fraud, Lower quality franchisees, Ludicrous demands, Mad as hell not going to take it anymore, Massive defaults, Misrepresentations, Mom-and-Pop franchisees at greatest risk, Money pit franchise, Most lucrative form of commercial lending, franchising, Must buy only through franchisor (tied buying), Name and shame campaign, No franchisor support, Misrepresentation, Only 3 ways out: resell to next loser, independence & be sued or abandon and go bankrupt, Only opening new stores for the quick cash grab, Opportunism Test: If asset ownership were reversed, would decision likely change?, Opportunism: contract creates powers which are used to strip investor value during relationship, Opportunism: self-interest with deceit, Past the Tipping Point of public contempt for franchising, Pawns in a game they can't win, Personal guarantees cause good money to go after bad, Piling on: franchisor can afford a few awards but not hundreds, Polishing a turd of an argument, Predatory actions, Predatory franchise lending, Predatory lending, Protect gross negligence, wanton recklessness and intentional misconduct, Rebranding financed by adding more government guaranteed loan, Rebranding is a great way to raise franchisor revenue, Relative of franchisor owns construction company, Renewal of contract contingent on franchisee waiving all legal rights, Renting a business causes problems down the road, Restrict gag orders, Risk much higher for franchisee than independent business, Same-store sales drop, Scapegoating, Secret kickbacks and rebates, Selling franchisee won’t sell a new franchisee a financial time bomb, Should anyone trust anything associated with franchising anymore?, Sign away human rights and legal remedies, Statute of Limitations, Ontario: 2 to 15 years, Stores shuttered, Success or failure is within the direct control of the individual franchisee, Sue first and ask questions later, Sue the bank, Suppliers and landlords act as if they were the franchisor, Supply margins are a hidden added royalty payment, System designed to fail for franchisees, System is collapsing, Tied contracting, Tip of the iceberg, Trademark, Tremendous desire to warn others, Trial decision always appealed, Truth, Unproven business model, Unilateral changes in business model drive franchisees' profits down, Unsafe at any Brand?, Unsophisticated buyers, Volume rebates, Waiver of legal rights, War of attrition, When the franchisor tanks, so does the franchisee, Who selected these allegedly moron franchisees in the first place?, Why franchisors sublease to franchisees, Why should we care? It's not our money., Will work even when Variable costs > than Selling price, You may not be the 1st but you could be the next, Canada, 20120625 Dunkin donuts quebec

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License