Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Chair's column

Article Abstract:

The self-regulatory model practices recommended by the International Franchise Assn and the American Assn of Franchisees and Dealers are well-intentioned attempts at ensuring industry fairness, but such groups should note the failure of NASD's self-regulatory scheme for securities. Advocacy groups may be incapable of devising proper regulatory systems for their industries. Each advocacy groups represent a different constituency, which undermines each proposal's ability to ensure true fairness in franchise regulation.

Author: Spandorf, Rochelle B.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: Franchise Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 8756-7962
Year: 1996
Other Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities, Franchise Law, Editorial, United States, Commercial law

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Chair's column

Article Abstract:

The chair of the American Bar Association Forum Committee on Franchising changes hands at a time when franchising law is undergoing rapid change. Iowa has passed new laws, federal law for franchising has been proposed and the Federal Trade Commission has become more active in enforcement. The ABA has changed the rules governing the Forum, to allow it greater independence and increase its utility to its members.

Author: Lowell, H. Bret
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: Franchise Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 8756-7962
Year: 1992
Appointments, resignations and dismissals, A.B.A. Forum Committee on Franchising

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Comments on Federal Franchise Disclosure and Relationship Bills

Article Abstract:

The two bills proposed in the House to create federal rules for franchises suffer from three flaws. They do not provide any framework for integration with existing federal and state laws, do not recognize the economic burdens that will be incurred by franchisors in complying with the new rules, and are not based on any evidence of systemic abuse by franchisors that would justify the new laws.

Author: Lowell, H. Bret
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: Franchise Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 8756-7962
Year: 1992

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Laws, regulations and rules, Franchises
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Franchise commentary. Some remarks on the Federal Fair Franchise Practices Act. New Iowa franchise law: franchisors (and franchisees) beware
  • Abstracts: Florida clarifies enforcement of noncompetes. Choice of law in franchise relationships: staying within bounds
  • Abstracts: Lloyd's dodges big bullet on appeal; a ruling that its insurance contracts are subject to SEC regulation is reversed
  • Abstracts: Decision on personnel at Pitt prompt staff and student protest. Hastings student is suspended for harassment, test violations
  • Abstracts: Lawyers need not be contingent-fee villains. 'Tis the season to be listful. Your right to counsel threatened
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.