What California law governs the termination or non-renewal of a Dryject franchise agreement?
Dryject Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
The Franchise Agreement is modified as follows: part of the Agreement. This Rider is being executed because the Licensed Business to be operated by you pursuant to the Agreement will be located in the State of California and/or because you are a resident of the State of California.
-
- Termination/Non-renewal of Agreement by Franchisor. The California Business and Professions Code Sections 20000 through 20043 provide rights to the franchise owner concerning termination or non-renewal for a franchise. If the Franchise Agreement contains a provision that is inconsistent with the law, California law will control. Section 32 of the Agreement may not be enforceable under federal bankruptcy law.
Any condition, stipulation or provision in the Franchise Agreement which would result in your waiver of compliance with any provision of the California Franchise Relations Act is void to the extent that such provision violates such law.
Source: Item 8 — BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP (FDD pages 68–229)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to Dryject's 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, the California Business and Professions Code Sections 20000 through 20043 provide rights to the franchise owner concerning termination or non-renewal of a Dryject franchise. The FDD specifies that if any provision within the Dryject Franchise Agreement is inconsistent with this California law, then California law will take precedence. This ensures that Dryject franchisees in California are afforded the protections granted by the state's franchise laws regarding termination and non-renewal.
This protection is further reinforced by the statement that any condition, stipulation, or provision in the Franchise Agreement that would result in a franchisee waiving compliance with any provision of the California Franchise Relations Act is void to the extent that such provision violates the law. This prevents Dryject from including clauses in the agreement that might inadvertently or intentionally circumvent the franchisee's rights under California law.
Additionally, the Dryject FDD notes that Section 32 of the Franchise Agreement, which likely details termination procedures, may not be enforceable under federal bankruptcy law. This means that in cases of bankruptcy, federal law could supersede the terms outlined in Section 32, adding another layer of complexity to the termination process. Prospective franchisees should consult with legal counsel to fully understand their rights and obligations under both California law and federal bankruptcy law, especially concerning termination and non-renewal.