This week, the California legislature nearly unanimously approved Assembly Bill 525, which would (if signed by Gov. Brown) amend the existing California Franchise Relations Act (“CFRA”).
Last night I reviewed a franchise agreement and found a surprising, and illegal, provision buried deep in the contract. If ever there was a compelling case for being careful when you are choosing legal counsel, I just found the provision that makes it.
Tomorrow (Monday, June 29, 2015), California State Assembly Bill (AB) 525 will be considered by the Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee. If passed by the Senate, AB 525 will amend the existing California Franchise Relations Act by expanding protections for existing franchisees.
On May 14, 2015, the California state Assembly passed AB 525, a bill that would amend the existing California Franchise Relations Act by expanding the protections for existing franchisees. The bill is now in the Senate for consideration.
FRANData, the company that operates the Franchise Registry for the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA), announced last week that it adopted the standard franchise definitions used by the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA) in the Multi-Unit Commentary that was issued in Fall 2014.
A federal court in Seattle has denied the International Franchise Association’s request to enjoin the portions of Seattle’s minimum wage law that discriminate against franchisees.