conditional

Under what circumstances does the 24-month non-compete period extend for an Angry Chickz Developer following termination or expiration of the franchise agreement?

Angry_Chickz Franchise · 2025 FDD

Answer from 2025 FDD Document

In the event of the violation of this provision by Developer following termination or expiration of this Agreement, the period of time Developer shall be required to abide by this obligation shall be extended to a period ending 24 months after Developer is no longer in default of this obligation.

Source: Item 22 — CONTRACTS (FDD page 54)

What This Means (2025 FDD)

According to Angry Chickz's 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, a Developer is subject to a 24-month non-compete clause following the termination or expiration of their franchise agreement. This prevents them from engaging in competitive activities within the Protected Area or within a 10-mile radius of any existing Angry Chickz restaurant.

However, the 24-month period can be extended if the Developer violates the non-compete obligations. Specifically, the non-compete period will be extended to end 24 months after the Developer is no longer in default of their non-compete obligation. This means that if a Developer breaches the non-compete agreement, the clock resets, and they must abide by the non-compete terms for an additional 24 months from the time they cease the violating activity.

This provision is designed to protect Angry Chickz's business interests and prevent former Developers from using the brand's confidential information and established goodwill to compete against the franchise. It ensures that Developers remain compliant with the non-compete agreement, as any violation will prolong the period during which they are restricted from engaging in competitive activities.

Disclaimer: This information is extracted from the 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document and is provided for research purposes only. It does not constitute legal or financial advice. Consult with a franchise attorney before making any investment decisions.