Phil Zeidman, a renowned international franchise attorney and general counsel to the International Franchise Association, observes what little regulation the world has is almost always legislated by a central government, as opposed to the American federal model. Zeidman thinks that is changing, most recently with Canada and now possibly Australia.

If there is to be any legislation at all, Zeidman argues that the federal (central) government is best positioned for franchise chains that almost certainly want to develop regionally and then nationally.

"perhaps the most level-headed comment came from the Chairman of the Franchisee Association of Australia, who said, 'I do oppose six or eight individual and territory pieces of regulation and legislation Franchising is a national business; it needs a national solution.'"

According to Zeidman, a rich Australian franchisee with strong political ties is upset that his own franchise agreement has reached maturity without being renewed by a multi-national franchisor. The franchisee now wants Australia's government to change the law to create a right so that his considerable franchise empire can remain under his ownership.

"As a matter of substance, the franchisee's complaint would appear to have no legal merit:  It is clear under Australian law that the parties can agree to a franchise agreement with no right to renew. Nor is there a great deal of precedent for a legislative remedy to the franchisee's discontent:  A study of the franchise laws in some 50 jurisdictions in the world (including each of those in the United States) reveals only a tiny minority which might provide redress in this circumstance."

Philip Zeidman of DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary has been a global Franchise Lawyer of the Year 2005 and 2006 in the Who’s Who Legal Awards.

Read attorney Phil Zeidman's full comments in Franchise Times