find the latest legal job
Corporate Counsel and Company Secretary
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Newcastle, Maitland & Hunter NSW
· Highly-respected, innovative and entrepreneurial Not-for-Profit · Competency based Board
View details
Chief Counsel and Company Secretary
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Newcastle, Maitland & Hunter NSW
· Dynamic, high growth organisation · ASX listed market leader
View details
In-house Projects Lawyer | Renewables / Solar | 2-5 Years PQE
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: All Australia
· Help design the future · NASDAQ Listed
View details
Insurance Lawyer (3-5 PAE)
Category: Insurance and Superannuation Law | Location: Brisbane CBD & Inner Suburbs Brisbane QLD
· Dynamic organisation ·
View details
Legal Counsel
Category: Corporate and Commercial Law | Location: North Sydney NSW 2060
· 18 month fixed term contract · 3-5 years PQE with TMT exposure
View details
Ketchell not a carte blanche for franchisors

Ketchell not a carte blanche for franchisors

RELIEF HAS surged through the franchise industry following the High Court’s unanimous reversal of the controversial decision in Master Education Services Pty Limited v Ketchell [2008].The…

RELIEF HAS surged through the franchise industry following the High Court’s unanimous reversal of the controversial decision in Master Education Services Pty Limited v Ketchell [2008].

The franchising industry has been anxiously watching the progress of the case, with the appeal funded by the Franchise Council of Australia. In the judgment handed down on 27 Augus, the High Court overturned the decision of the Appeal Court — an exceptional result, according to Deacons partner Stephen Giles.

“It’s hard to get special leave to appeal to the High Court. It’s even harder to then be successful on appeal. It’s almost unheard of to have a unanimous decision of the High Court,” he said. “I think the reality is that, as the Allphones case showed, the Court of Appeal got it completely wrong.”

Giles said his first reaction on hearing the decision was to breathe a sigh of relief. He said the decision would create greater certainty for clients and reinforce the availability of flexible remedies under the existing Trade Practices regime.

“I’m relieved that the whole thing is over and that everybody’s now got the certainty and the clarity that they need,” he said.

The High Court held that a failure to comply with clause 11(1) of the Franchising Code of Conduct did not automatically result in the illegality and unenforceability of the franchise agreement made between the franchisor and the franchisee.

“It puts the regulatory environment back to where everybody thought it was, one which had some strong remedies, but it was also very flexible and could be tailor-made to suit the purposes,” Giles said.

However, Giles warned that franchisers who did not take compliance with the Code seriously would still face serious consequences. “The High Court appeared to indicate that only ‘inconsequential’ breaches would avoid serious consequences,” he said.

The court’s reasoning also indicated a more prominent role for unconscionable conduct in franchising. In particular, the court focused on the parliamentary Second Reading Speech of the Trade Practices Amendment (Fair Trading) Bill 1997, highlighting the Parliament’s intention to address the issues of inequality of bargaining power and poor disclosure of information.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if the current law on unconscionable conduct is a bit broader than what people think it is at the moment,” Giles said. “From a franchisor’s perspective, they need to be very careful about disclosure. They also need to be careful about unconscionable conduct.

“The court made it pretty clear that the code is there to protect franchisees. If there are problems with disclosure, the court will regard that as a serious breach, because the Parliament has given a clear legislative intention as to what it wants to do. So it [Ketchell] isn’t carte blanche for franchisors by any means.”

Like this story? Read more:

QLS condemns actions of disgraced lawyer as ‘stain on the profession’

NSW proposes big justice reforms to target risk of reoffending

The legal budget breakdown 2017

Ketchell not a carte blanche for franchisors
lawyersweekly logo
Promoted content
Recommended by Spike Native Network
more from lawyers weekly
LCA president Fiona McLeod SC
Aug 17 2017
Where social fault lines meet the justice gap in Aus
After just returning from a tour of the Northern Territory, LCA president Fiona McLeod SC speaks wit...
Marriage equality flag
Aug 17 2017
ALHR backs High Court challenge to marriage equality postal vote
Australian Lawyers for Human Rights (ALHR) has voiced its support for a constitutional challenge to ...
Give advice
Aug 17 2017
A-G issues advice on judiciary’s public presence
Commonwealth Attorney-General George Brandis QC has offered his advice on the public presence of jud...
Allens managing partner Richard Spurio, image courtesy Allens' website
Jun 21 2017
Promo season at Allens
A group of lawyers at Allens have received promotions across its PNG and Australian offices. ...
May 11 2017
Partner exits for in-house role
A Victorian lawyer has left the partnership of a national firm to start a new gig with state governm...
Esteban Gomez
May 11 2017
National firm recruits ‘major asset’
A national law firm has announced it has appointed a new corporate partner who brings over 15 years'...
Nicole Rich
May 16 2017
Access to justice for young transgender Australians
Reform is looming for the process that young transgender Australians and their families must current...
Geoff Roberson
May 11 2017
The lighter side of the law: when law and comedy collide
On the face of it, there doesn’t seem to be much that is amusing about the law, writes Geoff Rober...
May 10 2017
Advocate’s immunity – without fear or without favour but not both
On 29 March 2017, the High Court handed down its decision in David Kendirjian v Eugene Lepore & ...