Foster enters into an agreement with Grab n' Eat Burgers,Inc.,to operate a franchise in Home Town. Later,Grab n' Eat grants franchises to others within the same territory,causing Foster to suffer a significant loss in profits. In Foster's suit against Grab n' Eat,Foster's best argument is that the franchisor

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The best argument for Foster is that Grab n' Eat violated the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by allowing other franchises to operate in the same territory, causing a significant loss in profits for Foster. This covenant is often implied in contracts and requires parties to act in good faith towards each other and not undermine each other's rights or benefits under the agreement. Foster can argue that by granting franchises to others within the same territory, Grab n' Eat breached this covenant and caused harm to Foster's business. Antitrust laws and franchise fees are not the strongest arguments in this scenario, and the fact that Foster was the first franchisee in Home Town does not necessarily impact the case.

Foster Enters into an Agreement with Grab N' Eat Burgers,Inc