What section of the Bft Franchise Agreement does the Rider add to regarding Consent to Jurisdiction?
Bft Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
Governing Law; Consent to Jurisdiction. The following is added to the end of Sections 16.1 (Governing Law) and 16.6 (Consent to Jurisdiction) of the Franchise Agreement: ; provided, however, Franchisee may bring a lawsuit in Maryland for claims arising under the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law. | Maryland law will apply to claims arising under the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law.
Source: Item 17 — RENEWAL, TERMINATION, TRANSFER AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION (FDD pages 57–66)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to the 2025 Bft Franchise Disclosure Document, the Rider modifies Section 16.6, Consent to Jurisdiction, of the Franchise Agreement. Specifically, for franchisees in Maryland, the rider adds a provision allowing them to bring lawsuits in Maryland for claims arising under the Maryland Franchise Registration and Disclosure Law, and clarifies that Maryland law will apply to these specific claims.
For franchisees in Rhode Island, the rider adds language referencing Section 19-28.1-14 of the Rhode Island Franchise Investment Act, stating that Rhode Island law will apply to claims arising under the Rhode Island Franchise Investment Act to the extent required by applicable law.
For franchisees in North Dakota, the rider modifies Section 12.F, Consent to Jurisdiction, of the Multi-Unit Agreement, allowing the developer to bring an action in North Dakota for claims arising under the North Dakota Franchise Investment Law, to the extent required by the North Dakota Franchise Investment Law. This ensures that franchisees are able to pursue legal claims related to franchise investment laws within their own state, despite any general consent to jurisdiction clauses that might exist in the standard Franchise Agreement.