Mater Franchising arrangements will be the flavor of the day because it offers the franchisor the main benefit of the franchisee's familiarity with the area environment; provides access to local sales and marketing expertise and channels; reduces investment; requires negligible government approvals; provides freedom from recruitment of local workforce and consequently lowers the financial risk of the franchisor. The current regulatory restrictions on retail trading by foreign companies coupled with sustained economic growth; ever expanding market with a thriving class of urban consumers; quality consciousness amongst India customers are a number of the factors contribution to franchising being increasingly used as a style by foreign companies for entering India for the very first time. A normal master franchise arrangement enables the master franchisee to develop the company in confirmed territory beneath the franchisor's brand name and trademark with or without the right to manufacture the merchandise in accordance with the franchisors' operating guidelines coupled with assured financial returns to the franchisor.
There is of discussion on the requirement of enacting a specialized law to regulate this growing sector in India. Before I proceed with my thoughts on the subject, I would like to quote a couple of lines from a report presented by the International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT, an independent intergovernmental organization that India is a member) which states that "the building blocks of a successful franchising industry in virtually any country is based on the existence of a "healthy commercial law environment" which has been defined as you with a 'general legislation on commercial contracts, with a sufficient company law, where you can find sufficient notions of joint ventures, where intellectual property rights are in place and enforced and where companies can count on ownership of trademarks and know-how in addition to on confidentiality agreements' ;.The Indian legal environment is characterized by every one of these key attributes, a well known fact established by ever expanding international franchise relationships with India.
To gauge the necessity for a brand new legislation, let's first understand a number of the keys issues/concerns involving a franchising arrangement that generally contributes to potential disputes or disconnects between the parties and how they're protected or could be protected within the realm of current Indian legislation:
(1) Licensing and Utilization of Intellectual Property Rights: IP rights are an important part of all franchising arrangements and every franchising agreement involves transfer of some kind of IP right, either as a license of a trademark/service mark/trade name, or even a copyright, or even a patent, invention, design or even a trade secrets. The method of utilization of the IP rights and their protection against misuse is certainly one of the most important concerns of the Franchisor. A few of the disputes that arise during implementation of the franchise agreement relate solely to the scope and purpose of the trademark license, exclusivity of use and geographical scope, protection of confidentiality, extent of transfer of the know-how, misuse and damage caused to the brand and goodwill of the franchisor, etc. Similarly, post termination related issues include unauthorized utilization of the trademarks post termination, limited directly to utilize the trademarks for the purposes of disposal of pending inventory (in the lack of which the inventory may go waste), destruction of stationary containing trademarks/trade names, return and ceassation of utilization of IP rights. India already has a number of IPR related laws including the Trademark Act of 1940, Copyright Act, 1957, the Patent Act, etc that offer for extensive protection and enforcement mechanism for the intellectual property rights including permanent and mandatory injunctions against infringement and passing off. India is also a signatory to the international conventions on intellectual property rights including the Agreement on Trade Related Facets of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), thereby offering protection to trademarks or brand names, in addition to copyright and designs of the foreign franchisor. Recognition and protection is also extended to service marks in India enabling the foreign franchisor to license its mark to a franchisee to provide the services synonymous with him to the consumers in India. IPR laws have already been recently amended to create them compliant with exclusive right obligations under TRIPS and accordingly, the laws meet international standards for IPR protection. Even the Indian courts are very sensitive and proactive pertaining to enforcement of infringement actions. It's therefore evident it is not the lack of IPR laws or its enforcement that cause potential disputes but lack of carefully drafted and negotiated agreements between the franchisor and the franchisee linked to IPR problems that cause potential IP related litigations.
(2) Obligations of Franchisor and Franchisee: Another crucial issue that cause potential disputes amongst the parties relate solely to implementation of the obligations of a franchisee such as the duties and services to be rendered by the franchisee, the investment and infrastructure of the franchise, adherence to specific operating guidelines or manual to keep uniformity, reporting requirements, quality maintenance of the product or services delivered; creation of an agency between franchisor and franchisee, appointment of sub-contractors to manufacture and sub-franchisee to sell the merchandise and franchisor and franchisee's liability owing for their acts/omissions; meeting of annual market penetration targets; minimum stock purchase/import obligations; financial returns to the franchisor, including royalty and fee. Similarly, obligations of the franchisor linked to periodic training regarding conduct of business, upgrading the franchisee with new methods and technologies, ongoing support, recommendations on general operational, management, accounting and administrative practices, joint marketing and advertising campaigns, sharing of advertising costs generally cause heart burns to the franchisee.
The Indian Contract Act, 1872 is applicable to all or any the franchise arrangements and makes for specific parameters for legally enforceable agreements, lawful object and purpose of an agreement, lawful consideration for an agreement, performance of an agreement, statutory interventions in unfair or unconscionable transactions, consequences of fraud, misrepresentation and undue influence, voidability and rescission/repudiation of agreement, contracts in restraint of trade, contingent and conditional contracts, performance of reciprocal promises, discharge and frustration of contracts, consequences of breach and rights linked to liquidated damages, enforcement of indemnification rights, agents and principal relationship and obligations thereto. It's not having less commercial law but lack of carefully drafted agreements that generally fail the parties. It's therefore important a franchisee tries to bridge all potential gaps by identifying and analyzing "what if?" situations keeping in perspective the franchisee's financial, technical, manufacturing, marketing, human resource, sales and business planning capabilities.
All of this does not need a specialized law which is already available in the shape of the Indian Contract Act but a reasonably detailed and well negotiated contract. Whatever the case a specialized law can just only provide a wide frame work, the facts and the nitty-gritty of the connection has to be always contractually agreed.
(3) Payment Terms: Delay in payment or non-payment of license and/or royalty payments might be another area of concern for the franchisor. Therefore the manner in which and the occasions of which such payments can be made must certanly be carefully addressed. In the case the franchisor is a foreign entity, applicability of prior approvals and terms and conditions for foreign remittance must be informed to the foreign party. The Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 and the Regulations made there under specifically address the outbound payment related issues. As an example, an Indian franchisee can remit royalty towards license of trademark upto the total amount of 1% of domestic sales and 2% of exports without prior government approval. If the licensor also provides technical understand how to the Indian licensee, the Indian company can remit royalty upto 5% of domestic sales and 8% of exports and lump sum payment of upto US$ 2 million without prior government approval. Payment of royalty above the percentages specified above would require prior government approval. Detailed tax laws are already set up to deal with the withholding tax liability on such payments that might get reduced based upon the provisions in the applicable double taxation avoidance agreement. The main element issue is that both the franchisor and franchisee should be made aware in advance on the payment and taxation related regulations. DUI
(4) Duration, Renewal and Termination and its Consequences: Another serious concern of a franchisee may be the extendibility of the definition of of the franchising and licensing agreement. Typically, extension of the definition of is the only real discretion of the franchisor predicated on annual sales turnovers and performance of the franchisee. Quite often a franchisee struggles with the franchisor for renewal of the definition of especially once the franchisor is set up with a great many other franchisees offering higher royalties. Another possible scenario is each time a franchisee is suddenly informed of an abrupt termination of the franchise agreement leaving the franchisee with costs of salaries, infrastructure and interest on working capital and other debts. Now do we want a law to tackle with this specific abrupt termination or non-renewal situations. To begin with, it should be clearly understood that most agreements entered into between private parties (whether under franchise domain or some other commercial arrangements) are terminable in nature. This is whatever the terms in the franchise agreement that the contract is interminable. The Indian Contract Act 1872 and the Specific Relief Act, 1963 supported by various Supreme Court judgments are clear that even yet in the lack of specific clause authorizing and enabling either party to terminate the agreement, from the very nature of the agreement, which is private commercial transaction, the exact same might be terminated even without assigning any reason by serving an acceptable notice.
Keeping this in perspective, it is advisable to negotiate for an open ended term (i.e., no fixed term) agreement with suitable termination clauses on breach with adequate notice period for rectification of breach/default. Though non-provision of the agreed notice will render the franchisor liable for damages beneath the Indian Contract Act, it is advisable to stipulate liquidated damages or substantial termination fees payable by the franchisor on breach of express termination provisions. Suitable exit options should also be provided if both parties are not ready to continue. A few of the key post termination problems that cause potential dispute and are adequately protected by the existing Indian laws include:
(i) Misuse of IPR rights and Confidential Information post termination is generally a mater of concern for the franchisor. While you can find adequate IPR protection laws against misuse and consequent infringement/passing off actions coupled with rights for permanent and mandatory injunctions beneath the Specific Relief Act, it is important to provide provisions constraining the franchisee from using the IP rights of the franchisor and return of all confidential information obtained during the definition of of the agreement.
(ii) Protection of franchisees against negative covenants particularly relating to non-competition post termination. It must be understood a negative covenant restraining the franchisee from directly or indirectly undertaking business competing with the company of the franchisor throughout the subsistence of the agreement may not be violative of section 27 of the Contract Act, but post termination negative covenants may not be enforceable under Indian laws. This in turn protects the franchisee against unreasonable negative covenants imposed by the franchisor post termination.
