The Franchise Owner's most trusted news source


Log In / Register | Jul 17, 2018

Arbitrator Rejects Tilted Kilt's Damage Claim as 'Disproportionate, Unreasonable, Unconscionable and Grossly Oppressive'

In a recent post on this site, I argued that (absent a specific agreement) there is no general requirement that the Awards issued in arbitration must remain secret and that:

Lawyers that try cases for a living know both intrinsically and anecdotally the risk of hearing frivolous arguments and perjury is much higher when the offending lawyers and witnesses believe their words will most likely remain secret.  The deliberately mistaken belief that arguments can be made in secret, often heard from franchisors seeking one-sided advantage from secrecy, inevitably spawns the presentation of arguments that would be sanctionable if made in open court and which sometimes cross the line into moral outrage.   

A perfect example of this was presented in a recently concluded Arbitration in which the Arbitrator rejected a $25 million damages claim being asserted by the Franchisor against a terminated Area Developer as being “disproportionate, unreasonable, unconscionable and grossly oppressive.”  The same Arbitrator held that the Franchisor could not recover Liquidated Damages from the same Area Developer, which was also a franchisee of a failed unit, because the LD clause was an unenforceable penalty under the facts of the case.

I respectfully submit that in a court of law, in a trial open to the press and public and where the decision would be published and become a precedent for future cases, a franchisor would be very reluctant to make claims that are “disproportionate, unreasonable, unconscionable and grossly oppressive.”  So why did Tilted Kilt Franchise Operating LLC (the proprietor of the TILTED KILT “breastuarant” pubs) feel free to make these “disproportionate, unreasonable, unconscionable and grossly oppressive” arguments in Arbitration?   The apparent reason is this franchisor would prefer to argue in perceived secrecy, lest the world of prospective franchisees be clued in to how this franchisor and its attorneys (veteran members of the American Bar Association Forum on Franchising) prefer to operate.

​Not only does the perception of secrecy spawn bad behavior, in this as in most areas of life, a deeper problem is that secrecy in arbitration serves by design to weaken the "common law" by creating a new brand of "private law" in which the same franchisor is free to repeat the same “disproportionate, unreasonable, unconscionable and grossly oppressive" arguments in its next arbitration.  Injured from this intended secrecy are the next franchisees that might not have the same success defeating these claims as well as future franchisees who might buy into a brand without knowing it is dealing with a company that is all too willing to make arguments and claims that do indeed cross the line into moral outrage.

My colleague Jackie Condella and I are proud to have defeated these damage claims in this particular case and we would be delighted to share the elements of the arguments we made to benefit other franchisees facing similary ludicrous claims.

But there was another aspect of this decision we find equally troubling that we will address in a separate post.

​Until then, lawyers committed to justice must work towards bringing arbitration awards into the light of day.

Your rating: None Average: 3.7 (3 votes)

About Carmen Caruso

Carmen Caruso's picture

Public Profile

Our law firm represents franchisees and dealers, and their independent associations, in all industries, in Chicago and across the country, and we have achieved enviable success in this field.  We are honored by every major service that rates lawyer performance:  Chambers USA, Best Lawyers, Best Law Firms, Super Lawyers, Leading Lawyers (Illinois), Bar Register of Preeminent Lawyers, and Franchise Times Legal Eagles (Hall of Fame member).   We earn these rankings by hard work, an unwavering ethical compass and committment to our clients, and a clear mission and vision.

We try more cases, in court or arbitration, than most other lawyers. This vital distinction enables us to negotiate from positions of strength.

We stand out in being frequently called on to defend other lawyers accused of legal malpractice, and sometimes we have the unpleasant but necessary duty of holding other lawyers accountable for their mistakes or ethical lapses that result in injury to their clients.  In over 30 years of practice I have a clear and unblemished record enabling our Firm to undertake these engagements.  

We also represent select franchisors that are committed to "best practices" and "win win" franchising for the benefit of themselves and their franchisees.

We have deep experience in most every type of case that might arise in a francjhise, dealership or distribution relationship, and are partcularly proud to be trailblazers in protecting civil rights in franchising.

Our firm is growing and thriving.   We earn our clients' loyalty every day.  Thank you for your consideration. I can be reached by phone at (312) 626-1160 or email.