Illinois Compiled Statutes
815 ILCS 705/4 (2026)
Jurisdiction and venue
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(815 ILCS 705/4)
(from Ch. 121 1/2, par. 1704)
Sec. 4.
Jurisdiction and venue.
Any provision in a franchise
agreement that designates jurisdiction or venue in a forum
outside of this
State is void, provided that a franchise agreement may provide
for arbitration in a forum outside of this State.
(Source: P.A. 88-256.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1993–2012 · leading case: Jensen v. Quik Int'l, 820 N.E.2d 462 (Ill. 2004).
Jensen v. Quik Int'l, 820 N.E.2d 462 (Ill. 2004). “815 ILCS 705/4 (West 2002). The holding in Barter Exchange would undermine this policy by allowing the party seeking to avoid arbitration to do so by merely alleging that no contract existed.”
Jacob v. C & M Video, Inc., 618 N.E.2d 1267 (Ill. App. Ct. 1993). “) Plaintiffs’ argument that the Franchise Disclosure Act is eviscerated if arbitration of disputes is required holds little weight given the fact that the Act itself recognizes arbitration as a tool in resolving franchise disputes (see 815 ILCS 705/4 (West 1992)). We do not…”
Stuller, Inc. v. Steak N Shake Enter., Inc., 877 F. Supp. 2d 674 (C.D. Ill. 2012). “16 (d/e 92-2) (same); see also 815 ILCS 705/4 (“Any provision in a franchise agreement that designates jurisdiction or venue in a forum outside of this State is void”).”
Jensen v. Quik Int'l (Ill. 2004). “815 ILCS 705/4 (West 2002). The holding in Barter Exchange would undermine this policy by allowing the party seeking to avoid arbitration to do so by merely alleging that no contract existed.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.
|