Les obligations du franchiseur : étude du droit civil et du guide d'Unidroit sur les accords internationaux de franchise principale

The Franchise: a magic formula that each individual would like to possess to be able to ensure success in the business world. The secret of this formula exists in the shape of a simple postulate: for the franchisee to reiterate success of the franchised concept, which has already proven itself successful. But first, it is essential that the franchisor transmit the essential elements ofthat success to the franchisee, so that the latter may put into practice those prescribed elements as per the created by the initiators concept and control. This kind of transaction requires that both protagonists enter into their dealing in a manner that is based on cooperation, trust, loyalty and goodfaith. Nevertheless, this process is not easy to establish. In deed, both parties may have divergent interests, causing conflicts and antipathies. Thus, the contractual relationship born ofthe franchise concept, will have at its core a manifest imbalance created by the dominant financial status ofthe franchisor. The latter, is in a position to unilaterally stipulate the contractual contents, in such a manner as to diminish his own obligations while enlarging the scope of his rights. From this, a plethora of opportunistic behaviours from the franchisor translating into varied kinds of abuse to the detriment of the franchisee whom has not choice but to acquiesce to the franchisors wishes. In truth, the study of civil law reveals that the civil systems are founded on a liberal conception of the contract, presuming that both parties are capable of defending their interests. By virtue of the theory of autonomy of the will, the contract is presumed to respect each partie 's interests. Without any vice of consent, the contract can only be balanced. However, if the contract proves to be imbalanced, civil law, unless there are no exceptional circumstances, will have no effect, in such a case. Lesion don't vice conventions concluded between unprotected parties, and the imprevision theory is rejected by most civil systems. The indifference of civil law to the contractual imbalance is justified by two imperatives: contractual liberty and judicial security. The principal of the obligatory force of a contract imposes on both parties, as well as to the judge, and, in that way, excludes all attempts by judge to revise the imbalanced contract. Nonetheless, in spite of the laws indifference and opposition to change, the law has since evolved enormously in supplying more protection to the weakest party of a contract. Thus, we are now witness to a double, more realistic intervention: the intervention of the judge and the legislator (particularly in contracts of adhesions). First, the judge manifests a will to correct the more obviously imbalanced aspects of the contract, most notably with regards to the presence of abusive contractual clauses, taking into account the requirements of a contractual justice based on the goodfaith of both parties and the obligation to act in a reasonable manner. Furthermore, the legislator through the use of special rights for the purpose of protecting the weakest party within the contract, implements imperative rules to restore the balance and fairness of the contract. This worry of protection is justified by the undermine as so imposed to the obligatory force of the contract. Also, the postulate of Fouillée is here revoked by Lacordaire which underlines that between the strong and the weak, it is freedom that enslaves and the law that liberates. To summarize, the protection of the franchisee calls for the modification of the contractual obligation from one of conflict to one of cooperation and notably by the recognition of the contractual solidarity concept. Nevertheless, such a measure does not take place without disturbing the classic concept of the contract. On the one hand, the introduction of the implied terms into the contract denies the traditional idea of the contractual obligations based on the common intention of both parties, and also, it calls for the reconsideration, by the civil systems, of the theory of imprevision as is suggested by the uniform law and especially the Guide to international master franchise arrangements, but also the Unidroit Principles of international commercial contracts.

Keyphrases: Franchise, Unidroit, Clauses abusives, Franchisor obligations, UNIDROIT, adhesion contract, Contractual imbalance, Abuse of right, Abusive clauses, Good faith, Reasonability, Implied terms