Tasty & Delicious Ltd were entitled to terminate the franchise agreement by reason of Matt's breach of

Fantastic news! We've Found the answer you've been seeking!

Question:

Tasty & Delicious Ltd were entitled to terminate the franchise agreement by reason of Matt's breach of contract, they decided not to do so when Matt agreed to hire the marketing company Marketing4U Ltd to change the promotional material according to the instructions issued by Tasty & Delicious. Matt informed Marketing4U that his business would be inspected by Tasty & Delicious during the first week of September so he would need everything ready by then. Matt instructed Marketing4U that the Tasty & Delicious trademark must be printed on all the brochures and the meal delivery boxes used when customers order take-away meals.

Marketing4U printed the trademark on the brochures in a larger size text than initially agreed with Matt because they thought that a larger size fits better with the design of the brochure. They supplied the delivery boxes one week late because their specialised printer had broken down and they could not obtain a replacement immediately.

Because the delivery boxes were not ready on time, Matt was unable to sell take-away meals for a week, which he had expected to be an important source of income. For the same reason he was unable to supply Simply Tech Ltd, a company situated nearby that had contracted with Matt to pay him £50,000 to deliver lunch daily for their 50 employees for an entire month. Simply Tech consequently cancelled their contract with Matt in accordance with its terms, but fortunately before Matt had bought any ingredients for these lunches. The unusually high price that Simply Tech was willing to pay for the lunches is explained by the fact that the contract was concluded while Matt's mother owned the company, but she sold it soon afterwards. Since his business is new, Matt is unable to prove whether he would have sold enough take-away meals to the general public during that week to make a profit. However, he can prove that he spent £10,000 on buying ingredients for take-away meals for the general public, as well as that he would have made £30,000 profit on the contract with Simply Tech. Matt donated the unused £10,000 worth of ingredients to a charity for homeless people rather than sell them for £2,000 to Jenny, another Tasty & Delicious franchisee, who had offered to buy them from him.

Although the trademark on the brochures is perfectly suitable for Matt's purposes and in line with the guidelines provided by Tasty & Delicious, despite being larger than agreed, Matt is extremely disappointed with the appearance of the brochures. He does not agree with Marketing4U that a larger size trademark fits better with the design of the brochures. They have informed him that this can only be rectified by destroying this batch and printing a new batch with a smaller trademark, and that they are not prepared to do so unless he pays them the full cost of doing so, which is equal to the original contract price. Matt has obtained quotations from other marketing companies and discovered that they would charge the same. He remains keen to have the brochures redone but does not have the financial resources to pay for this himself.

As a result of the financial worries caused by all this, especially losing the contract with Simply Tech, Matt suffers from stress and depression. To recover from this, his doctor has prescribed expensive treatment in a psychiatric facility.

Advise Matt on any claims for damages he might be able to bring against Marketing4U.