Today, the Supreme People's Court issued 7 typical cases of franchising to guide and regulate the honest and compliant operation of business entities and promote the healthy and orderly development of franchises. One characteristic is that the legal rights and interests of the franchisee are protected by law. In franchising activities, the information between the franchisor and the franchisee is asymmetrical and the ability to sign contracts is unequal. The franchisee is in a relatively weak position and is prone to an imbalance of rights and obligations. In case 2, although the contract involved in the case did not clearly stipulate that the franchisee can unilaterally cancel the contract within a certain period of time after the conclusion of the franchise contract, the People's Court made it clear that the franchisee's right to unilaterally cancel the “cooling-off period” is a legal right, and the franchisee can exercise it according to law within a reasonable period of time when the operating resources have not been actually used. In case 5, the franchisor's eligibility for filing was revoked during the execution of the contract, and the ability to perform the contract was clearly weakened. The People's Court upheld the franchisee's claim to cancel the contract in accordance with the law.

Today, the Supreme People's Court issued 7 typical cases of franchising to guide and regulate the honest and compliant operation of business entities and promote the healthy and orderly development of franchises. One characteristic is that the legal rights and interests of the franchisee are protected by law. In franchising activities, the information between the franchisor and the franchisee is asymmetrical and the ability to sign contracts is unequal. The franchisee is in a relatively weak position and is prone to an imbalance of rights and obligations. In case 2, although the contract involved in the case did not clearly stipulate that the franchisee can unilaterally cancel the contract within a certain period of time after the conclusion of the franchise contract, the People's Court made it clear that the franchisee's right to unilaterally cancel the “cooling-off period” is a legal right, and the franchisee can exercise it according to law within a reasonable period of time when the operating resources have not been actually used. In case 5, the franchisor's eligibility for filing was revoked during the execution of the contract, and the ability to perform the contract was clearly weakened. The People's Court upheld the franchisee's claim to cancel the contract in accordance with the law.