Kubota Tractor Corp. makes farm, industrial, and outdoor equipment. Its franchise contracts allow Kubota to enter into dealership agreements with “others at any location.”

Kubota Tractor Corp. makes farm, industrial, and outdoor equipment. 

Its franchise contracts allow Kubota to enter into dealership agreements with “others at any location.” Kejzar Motors, Inc., is a Kubota dealer in Nacogdoches, Texas and Jasper, Texas.

 These two Kejzar stores operate as one dealership with two locations. Kubota granted a dealership to Michael Hammer in Lufkin, Texas, which lies between Kejzar’s two store locations.

 Kejzar filed a suit in a Texas state court against Kubota. 

Kejzar asked for an injunction to prevent Kubota from locating a dealership in the same market area. 

Kejzar argued that the new location would cause it to suffer a significant loss of profits. 

[Kejzar Motors, Inc. v. Kubota Tractor Corp., 334 S.W.3d 351 (Tex.App.—Tyler 2011)] 

Which party in a franchise relationship typically determines the territory served by a franchisee? 

Which legal principles come into play in this area? 

How do these concepts most likely apply in this case?