Does Bambu or the franchisee have the right to obtain temporary or preliminary injunctive relief from a court?
Bambu Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
s behalf or on behalf of any of the Franchisee Affiliates by any third party, including but not limited to any association representing Franchisee.
- 23.4 Injunctive Relief. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Article 23, Bambu and Franchisee will each have the right in a proper case to obtain temporary or preliminary injunctive relief from a court of competent jurisdiction. Each party agrees that the other party may have such temporary or preliminary injunctive relief, without bond, but upon due notice, and with the sole remedy in the event of the entry of such injunctive relief being the dissolution of such injunctive relief, if warranted, upon hearing
duly held (all claims for damages by reason of the wrongful issuance of such injunction being expressly waived by each party). Any such action will be brought as provided in Section 23.5 below.
- 23.5 Governing Law/Consent to Jurisdiction/Waiver of Jury Trial. The United States Federal Arbitration Act shall govern all questions about the enforceability of Sections 23.1 and 23.
Source: Item 23 — Receipts (FDD pages 52–209)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to Bambu's 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, both Bambu and the franchisee have the right to seek temporary or preliminary injunctive relief from a court of competent jurisdiction in a proper case. This means that either party can ask a court to issue an order to stop the other party from doing something while a legal case is ongoing.
The FDD specifies that such injunctive relief may be granted without a bond, but upon due notice. The sole remedy if such injunctive relief is entered is the dissolution of the injunctive relief, if warranted, upon a hearing. Both parties expressly waive any claims for damages resulting from the wrongful issuance of such an injunction.
However, the FDD also notes a modification for franchisees in Minnesota. According to Minnesota Rule 2860.4400(J), a franchisee cannot consent to Bambu obtaining injunctive relief. In Minnesota, Bambu may seek injunctive relief, and a court will determine if a bond is required. This indicates that while the general agreement allows both parties to seek injunctive relief, Minnesota law provides additional protection to franchisees by preventing them from consenting to such relief in advance and leaving the bond decision to the court's discretion.