12/08/2026
7-Eleven & Nando’s walking over hard working family’s opinion
7-Eleven
• Ex-franchisees allege head office blocks store sales, then reclaims the franchise at agreement expiry with zero goodwill payout
• Families report investing $1M+ and walking away with nothing
• Protests outside Melbourne HQ; A Current Affair covered “mum and dad investors” who lost everything
• Legal experts: unreasonably refusing transfer consent may breach Franchising Code of Conduct + Oil Code
• 7-Eleven defence: “profits during operation are the compensation”; claims 95% renewal/transfer rate over 10 yrs
• Priory form: $98M class-action settlement for misleading franchisees on store profitability
• Jim Penman (Jim’s Group) offered affected franchisees free Jim’s franchises — PR knife-twist
Nando’s
• Mandatory store refurbishments costing $150k–$1M+ per store, demanded mid-term
• Franchisees who refused faced non-renewal or termination → forced closures
• Victorian Supreme Court cases: alleged breach of agreement, unconscionable conduct, bad faith
• Key legal question: enforceability of renovation clauses vs Franchising Code limits on significant capital expenditure during term
• Nando’s defence: costs disclosed upfront, brand standards justify spend
• Franchisee argument: costs never genuinely negotiated, ROI impossible for low-turnover stores
Pattern across both
• Franchisor uses contract control (fit-out demands / transfer veto) to squeeze or reclaim
• Goodwill franchisees build = legally theirs in spirit, contractually franchisor’s
• Code of Conduct enforcement weak ACCC relies on reports, disputes land in court at franchisee cost
