Can the Dryject franchise agreement restrict a franchisee's right to a jury trial under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act?

According to the 2025 Dryject FDD, provisions in the franchise agreement that unreasonably restrict or limit rights or remedies under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, such as the right to a jury trial, may not be enforceable. This means that while the agreement might contain language that appears to limit a franchisee's right to a jury trial, such provisions could be deemed unenforceable under Washington law.

This protection is significant for prospective Dryject franchisees in Washington because it ensures that they retain their legal rights under the state's Franchise Investment Protection Act. The Act is designed to protect franchisees from unfair practices by franchisors, and the right to a jury trial is an important aspect of that protection. If a dispute arises between Dryject and a franchisee, the franchisee has the potential option to have their case decided by a jury rather than solely by a judge or arbitrator.

However, the FDD language specifies that restrictions must be "unreasonable" to be unenforceable, which introduces a degree of subjectivity. A Dryject franchisee should consult with an attorney to determine whether a specific limitation on jury trials in their franchise agreement would be considered unreasonable under Washington law. This ensures they fully understand their rights and options in case of a dispute with Dryject.