Where does a Burger King franchisee consent to jurisdiction for any legal proceeding pertaining to the franchise agreement?

According to Burger King's 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, the issue of jurisdiction is addressed differently depending on the state where the franchise is located. For franchisees in North Dakota, the FDD states that the North Dakota Securities Commissioner has determined it is unfair and inequitable for Burger King to require franchisees to consent to the jurisdiction of courts outside of North Dakota. Therefore, any references in the Franchise Agreement that require the franchisee to consent to jurisdiction outside of North Dakota are deleted. Similarly, for franchisees in Illinois, any provision in the franchise agreement that designates jurisdiction or venue in a forum outside of Illinois is void, although the agreement may still provide for arbitration outside of the state.

For prospective Burger King franchisees, this means that the standard franchise agreement may be modified by state-specific amendments that protect franchisees from being forced to litigate disputes in unfavorable or distant jurisdictions. The amendments reflect a concern that franchisors with greater bargaining power might otherwise impose onerous conditions on franchisees, effectively limiting their legal recourse.

It is important for a prospective franchisee to carefully review the specific amendment applicable to their state to fully understand their rights and obligations regarding jurisdiction and venue. Franchisees should seek legal counsel to ensure they understand the implications of these provisions and how they may affect their ability to resolve disputes with Burger King.