RCW 19.100.220

Exceptions or exemptions—Burden of proof—Waivers of compliance void—Settlement release or waiver—Chapter as fundamental policy.

Known as the Franchise Investment Protection Act

The act spans §§ 19–19 (38 sections).

Applied in 7 court decisions — leading case Red Lion Hotels Franchising, Inc. v. MAK, LLC (2011)

Most recently applied in Sun v. Advanced China Healthcare, Inc. (August 2018)

1991 c 226 s 13; 1972 ex.s. c 116 s 14; 1971 ex.s. c 252 s 22.

How often courts cite this section

citing decisions per year

Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.

(1) In any proceeding under this chapter, the burden of proving an exception from a definition or an exemption from registration is upon the person claiming it.

(2) Any agreement, condition, stipulation or provision, including a choice of law provision, purporting to bind any person to waive compliance with any provision of this chapter or any rule or order hereunder is void. A release or waiver executed by any person pursuant to a negotiated settlement in connection with a bona fide dispute between a franchisee and a franchisor, arising after their franchise agreement has taken effect, in which the person giving the release or waiver is represented by independent legal counsel, is not an agreement prohibited by this subsection.

(3) This chapter represents a fundamental policy of the state of Washington.

Official source: Washington State Legislature. Reproduced from public-domain Washington statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.