What arbitration rules govern disputes for Beyond Juicery Eatery?
Beyond_Juicery_Eatery Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
on 16.05 contains a covenant not to compete that extends beyond the expiration or termination of the Agreement; this covenant may not be enforceable under California Law.
- The Franchise Agreement requires litigation to be conducted in a court located outside of the State of California. This provision might not be enforceable for any cause of Action arising under California law.
- The Franchise Agreement requires application of the laws of a state other than California. This provision might not be enforceable under California law.
- Section 23 requires binding arbitration. The arbitration will occur at the forum indicated in Section 23.02, with the costs being borne by the non-prevailing party.
Source: Item 23 — RECEIPTS (FDD pages 60–337)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to the 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, Section 23 of the Beyond Juicery Eatery franchise agreement mandates binding arbitration to resolve disputes. For franchisees in California, the arbitration will occur at the forum specified in Section 23.02, with the non-prevailing party responsible for covering the costs. The FDD advises prospective franchise owners to seek legal counsel to understand how California and federal laws, including specific sections of the Business and Professions Code, Code of Civil Procedure, and the Federal Arbitration Act, may affect franchise agreement provisions that restrict the venue to a location outside of California.
For franchisees in Indiana, Section 23.02 is amended such that arbitration between the franchisee and Beyond Juicery Eatery will be conducted at a mutually agreed upon location.
It is important for potential franchisees to understand that these stipulations regarding arbitration may vary based on state laws and to seek legal counsel to fully understand their rights and obligations.