KB-2021-000741 - [2025] EWHC 2096 (KB)

It is convenient to refer first to the Defendant, JBL, the franchisor and then to the Claimants, the franchisees.

JBL was incorporated in 2004. It trades as the Benson School of Motoring. Before then, Mr. John Benson had been a driving instructor with the British School of Motoring. In about 1993, he left to form the Benson School of Motoring which he operated at first as a sole trader. The Benson School of Motoring is said to be the largest independently owned driving school in East Anglia having over 100 franchisees. Almost all of the franchisees operate under franchise agreements with JBL.

The franchisees are driving instructors. Typically, they had no prior experience of being driving instructors or of trading on their own account. Their first franchise agreement provides for a period of training which is in various stages, after which they take on customers of their own. Most of the franchisees who gave evidence had limited academic qualifications usually confined to some examinations at school, most at GCSE/GCE O level and some had NVQ’s, national vocational qualifications. There was a variety of work histories. Some had been made redundant in previous work, some were looking for a change and some had taken a career break for family reasons. The common account was that they became interested in the combination of teaching driving and the concept of the business as explained to them by Mr Benson and others on behalf of JBL.

There are twenty Claimants. They were each represented and appeared, save for the Fourth, Fourteenth and Seventeenth Claimants, who did not appear at the trial. These unrepresented claimants were informed of the trial and appear to have elected not to participate in the trial. At the outset of the trial, this point was raised with the parties, and the Court was satisfied that they had knew about the hearing, and they still decided not to attend. The Fourth and Fourteenth Claimants did not provide witness statements: the Seventeenth Claimant provided a one-line witness statement but did not attend trial to be cross examined on the same.

The other Claimants all gave evidence. They were represented by Mr Mark Stephens of Counsel instructed by Aquabridge Law, which firm was involved at the point of the termination of their contracts in late 2020, in the commencement of proceedings on 2 March 2021 and thereafter. JBL was represented by Mr Andrew Butler KC and Ms Annie Higgo of Counsel who were instructed by Holmes and Hills solicitors who for many years have represented JBL including receiving correspondence leading to the termination of the contracts.

There are also Part 20 claims brought against guarantors who entered into guarantees of the franchise agreements. Many of the franchisees did not own a property of their own, in which case JBL required a guarantee, often from a parent. Whilst this did not involve a charge of the property, the experience of JBL was that enforcement of a judgment was easier where the person with whom they contracted owned a property. The Part 20 Defendants, the guarantors, have not been made parties to the preliminary issues, and so did not appear or play any part as guarantors in the trial.