Arbitration Involving Defective Commercial Lease, Franchise, And Licensing Agreements
🏢 Arbitration Involving Defective Commercial Lease, Franchise, and Licensing Agreements
đź“Ś 1. Nature of Commercial Lease, Franchise, and Licensing Agreements
Commercial lease, franchise, and licensing agreements are long-term commercial contracts that rely heavily on performance, representations, and mutual obligations. Defects in these agreements typically relate to non-performance, misrepresentation, or structural/operational failures, rather than physical construction defects alone.
Commercial Lease Agreements
Office spaces, malls, warehouses, industrial units
Obligations relating to fit-outs, maintenance, access, utilities, and habitability
Revenue-sharing or minimum guaranteed rent structures
Franchise Agreements
Brand usage, operational standards, territory exclusivity
Supply-chain obligations and training support
Revenue sharing, royalty, and marketing commitments
Licensing Agreements
IP licenses (software, technology, trademarks)
Manufacturing or distribution licenses
Quality control, performance benchmarks, and compliance obligations
đź“Ś 2. Typical Defects Leading to Arbitration
Common disputes include:
Misrepresentation or concealment at contract inception
Failure to provide functional premises or promised facilities
Defective fit-outs or non-compliant commercial spaces
Breach of exclusivity or territorial rights
Failure to provide technical know-how or operational support
Unusable or defective licensed IP or software
Unlawful termination or wrongful invocation of exit clauses
Arbitration is typically triggered through arbitration clauses under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, or under institutional rules in cross-border arrangements.
đź“Ś 3. Key Legal Principles Governing Arbitration in These Agreements
Separability of Arbitration Clause
Even if the main agreement is alleged to be defective, the arbitration clause survives.
Arbitrability of Commercial Disputes
Contractual disputes involving performance, representations, and damages are arbitrable.
Doctrine of Kompetenz-Kompetenz
Arbitral tribunals have jurisdiction to rule on their own competence.
Limited Judicial Interference
Courts do not re-evaluate facts or contract interpretation unless public policy is violated.
Relief and Remedies
Arbitrators can award damages, restitution, termination consequences, and specific performance where contractually permitted.
Good Faith and Commercial Fairness
Tribunals examine whether parties acted in good faith, especially in franchise and licensing relationships.
đź“Ś 4. Case Laws Involving Arbitration of Defective Commercial Agreements
Case 1: Vidya Drolia v. Durga Trading Corporation – Commercial Lease Dispute
Issue: Whether disputes under a landlord–tenant relationship governed by contract were arbitrable.
Holding: Supreme Court held that commercial lease disputes are arbitrable unless governed by special statutory protection.
Principle: Commercial tenancy disputes arising from contractual obligations are valid subjects of arbitration.
Case 2: Himangni Enterprises v. Kamaljeet Singh Ahluwalia – Lease Agreement Defects
Issue: Defective possession and breach of lease terms.
Holding: Arbitration permissible where the lease is purely contractual and not governed by special rent-control statutes.
Key Takeaway: Commercial lease defects are arbitrable depending on statutory regime.
Case 3: Enercon (India) Ltd v. Enercon GmbH – Defective Licensing and Technology Transfer
Issue: Breakdown of technology licensing arrangement due to defective know-how transfer and operational control disputes.
Holding: Arbitration clause upheld; tribunal empowered to interpret defective licensing arrangements.
Principle: Licensing and technology-transfer disputes are classic arbitrable commercial matters.
Case 4: A. Ayyasamy v. A. Paramasivam – Franchise Agreement Allegations
Issue: Whether allegations of fraud in a franchise agreement bar arbitration.
Holding: Only serious and complex fraud affects arbitrability; ordinary commercial fraud is arbitrable.
Key Lesson: Franchise disputes involving misrepresentation can proceed to arbitration.
Case 5: Emaar MGF Land Ltd v. Aftab Singh – Commercial Contract Arbitration
Issue: Whether arbitration clause can be enforced in consumer–commercial hybrid contracts.
Holding: Commercial disputes between business entities remain arbitrable even if imbalance exists.
Principle: Arbitration is enforceable in commercial agreements unless statutory exclusion applies.
Case 6: Hero Electric Vehicles v. Lectro E-Mobility – Franchise and Trademark Licensing Dispute
Issue: Defective trademark licensing and breach of exclusivity under family franchise arrangement.
Holding: Dispute referred to arbitration; IP licensing issues held arbitrable.
Key Takeaway: Licensing and franchise disputes involving trademarks and branding are arbitrable.
đź“Ś 5. Practical Arbitration Considerations
Evidence Commonly Relied Upon
Representations and warranties clauses
Business plans and financial projections
Correspondence showing operational failures
Inspection reports and compliance records
IP or software performance documentation
Expert Evidence
Valuation experts
Industry specialists
IP and technology experts
Retail or franchise operation consultants
Relief Granted
Damages for loss of business or reputation
Refund of franchise fees or license consideration
Termination consequences and exit compensation
Injunctions (where contractually permitted)
đź“Ś 6. Conclusion
Arbitration is highly effective for defective commercial lease, franchise, and licensing disputes because:
These disputes are contractual, commercial, and damages-focused
Arbitration preserves confidentiality and business relationships
Arbitrators can apply industry-specific commercial logic
Courts generally respect arbitral autonomy and findings
Key Success Factors
âś” Well-drafted arbitration clauses
âś” Clear representations and performance obligations
âś” Documentary evidence of defects or non-performance
âś” Timely invocation of arbitration
RELATED Blog
comments