In the event of a conflict of laws, which law prevails for City Wide franchises?
City_Wide Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
-
- Conflict of Laws. In the event of a conflict of laws, the provisions of the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, chapter 19.100 RCW will prevail.
-
- Franchisee Bill of Rights. RCW 19.100.180 may supersede provisions in the franchise agreement or related agreements concerning you relationship with the franchisor, including the areas of termination and renewal of your franchise.
There may also be court decisions that supersede the franchise agreement or related agreements concerning your relationship with the franchisor.
Franchise agreement provisions, including those summarized in Item 17 of the Franchise Disclosure Document, are subject to state law.
-
- Site of Arbitration, Mediation, and/or Litigation. In any arbitration or mediation involving a franchise purchased in Washington, the arbitration or mediation site will be either in the state of Washington, or in a place mutually agreed upon a the time of the arbitration or mediation, or as determined by the arbitrator or mediator at the time of the arbitration or mediation.
In addition, if litigation is not precluded by the franchise agreement, a franchisee my bring actions or proceeding arising out of or in connection with the sale of franchises, or a violation of the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, in Washington.
-
- General Release. A release or waiver of rights in the franchise agreement or related agreements purporting to bind he franchisee to waive compliance with any provision under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act or any rules or orders thereunder is void except when executed pursuant to a negotiated settlement after the agreement is in effect an d where the parties are represented by independent counsel, in accordance with RCW 19.100.220(2).
In addition, any such release or waiver executed in connection with a renewal or transfer of a franchise is likely void except as provided for in RCW 19.100.220(2).
-
- Statute of Limitations and Waiver of Jury Trial. Provision contained int eh franchise agreement or related agreements that unreasonably restrict or limit the statute of limitations period for claims under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, or rights or remedies under the Act such as a right to a jury trial, may not be enforceable.
Source: Item 22 — CONTRACTS (FDD page 65)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to City Wide's 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, in the event of a conflict of laws, the provisions of the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, chapter 19.100 RCW, will prevail. This means that if there is a disagreement between the franchise agreement and Washington state law, the state law will be followed. This protection is specifically for franchisees operating in Washington.
This clause is important for prospective City Wide franchisees in Washington because it ensures that their rights under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act are protected. The FDD also mentions that RCW 19.100.180 may supersede provisions in the franchise agreement or related agreements concerning the franchisee's relationship with City Wide, including areas of termination and renewal. Additionally, court decisions may also supersede the franchise agreement.
Furthermore, the FDD states that franchise agreement provisions, including those summarized in Item 17, are subject to state law. This reinforces the idea that state laws, particularly the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, take precedence over the franchise agreement in certain situations. This protection extends to aspects like the site of arbitration, mediation, and/or litigation for franchises purchased in Washington.
Finally, any release or waiver of rights in the franchise agreement that attempts to waive compliance with any provision under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act is void, except under specific conditions such as a negotiated settlement with independent counsel. Provisions that unreasonably restrict the statute of limitations period for claims under the Act or rights to a jury trial may also be unenforceable.