INDEX / DIRECTORY / NANDO'S

Nando's

Restaurants & Fast Food 77 CITED SOURCES UPDATED 2026-08-30 METHOD V6.4
BDS-1000 Score 0 /1000 E Tier E - Limited
Military ↗ 0.00 Digital ↗ 0.00 Economic ↗ 0.00 Political ↗ 0.00
OWNERSHIP TREE 0 brands and group businesses View all

OpenIntel is reader-funded - no sponsors, no institutional money. Support OpenIntel →

Key Findings

  • Economic: Historical sources document an Israeli Nando’s franchise network from the 1990s through a 2007 trade-mark dispute, but do not establish continuing group ownership, royalty payments, or current operations.1, 2, 3
  • Political: The current official country locator lists 21 markets and does not list Israel; no public evidence identified of current settlement, West Bank, East Jerusalem, or Golan Heights activity.4, 5, 6
  • Settlements: Reviewed UN/OHCHR and Who Profits materials did not identify Nando’s; these are document-scoped findings, not proof of universal absence.5, 6, 7
  • Not found: No public evidence identified of Israeli military procurement, defence supply, security-base services, Israeli-origin surveillance technology, Project Nimbus participation, or Israeli state-security contracts.8, 9, 10

Target Profile

FieldDetail
Company NameNando’s Group Holdings Limited (NGHL); public-facing brand Nando’s
JurisdictionEngland and Wales; NGHL is an active private limited company incorporated on 12 December 2007.11
HeadquartersRegistered office: St Mary’s House, 42 Vicarage Crescent, London SW11 3LD.11
SectorRestaurant, food-service, franchise and holding-company operations.11, 12
OwnershipPrivately held. Companies House records Leslie Perlman as NGHL’s sole active person with significant control, holding 75% or more voting rights and director appointment/removal rights.13
Key Executives / GovernanceNGHL directors: Robert Adrian Graham ’t Hooft, Charles Francis Luyckx, Robert Stephen Papps, Leslie Perlman, Matthew Edward Bennison, and Graham Denis Allan.4
Israeli-Nexus SummaryHistorical Israeli franchise activity is documented; the available record does not verify current Israeli operations, settlement activity, defence relationships, or Israel-attributed revenue.

Key Facts:

Executive Summary

Nando’s is a privately held restaurant group whose relevant UK holding entity is Nando’s Group Holdings Limited. The documented Israel nexus is principally historical franchise activity. Contemporary and retrospective sources report Israeli outlets from the 1990s, a reported 2005 sale of the local network and brand to Yuval Doron’s Eddy/Edi Global Holdings, and subsequent 2007 litigation over asserted franchise, royalty, trade-mark, and operating-rights issues.1, 16, 2, 3, 17

The record does not establish that the historical Israeli franchise was a wholly owned NGHL subsidiary, that the reported expansion plans were completed, that the reported 1%-of-turnover royalties were paid, or that the international group retained equity ownership after the reported local sale.16, 2, 3 A 2025 secondary retrospective says Israeli activity closed shortly after the 2007 injunction, but no court record or Israeli corporate-registry extract was retrieved to establish the former franchise’s final legal status or closure date.17

The current official Nando’s country locator does not list Israel among its 21 advertised markets. No public evidence identified of post-2020 restaurants, offices, warehouses, employees, support centres, or operations in Israel, the West Bank including East Jerusalem, or the Golan Heights. The locator is evidence of current public presentation, not conclusive proof against every unadvertised commercial relationship.4, 5

No public evidence identified of military procurement, defence-prime supply, base catering, weapons or dual-use production, Israeli security contracts, Israeli-origin surveillance or cybertechnology deployment, Project Nimbus participation, settlement operations, political donations, anti-BDS advocacy, or conflict-related mobilisation of corporate assets.5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 On the fixed, examiner-approved V6.4 assessment supplied for this dossier, the resulting BRS is 0, placing Nando’s in Tier E (Minimal).

Timeline of Relevant Events

DateEvent
January 1994Telfed Magazine reported that Daniel Brozin held the franchise for the first Israeli Nando’s outlet in Herzliya, with two further branches planned.1
August 1996Globes reported three operating Israeli branches and a US$2.7 million plan for nine additional branches in 1997–98; the report documents a plan, not completion of all proposed outlets.16
2002A Telfed item described Nando’s activity in Israel contemporaneously, but the available extract does not establish outlet count, legal entity, ownership, or sourcing.18
2004–05 seasonGlobes reported a NIS 500,000 sponsorship contract involving Nando’s Israeli representatives and Bnei Sakhnin FC; the report identifies a commercial football sponsorship, not a state or military partnership.19
December 2005Globes reported that Yuval Doron’s Eddy Global Holdings acquired the local Nando’s network and brand, then reported as 17 branches; the report does not establish continuing international-group equity ownership.2
October 2007Globes reported that Nando’s International Holdings and Nando’s Resources sought interim relief against Israeli franchisees; reported royalty, hygiene, licence, and trade-mark assertions were allegations in the application.3
December 2007Globes reported a temporary Tel Aviv District Court injunction barring use of the Nando’s brand; the accessible report does not establish final disposition or subsequent entity status.17
30 August 2026Nando’s official country locator listed 21 markets and did not list Israel.4

Corporate Overview

NGHL is an active English private holding company, incorporated in 2007 and classified under SIC 70100, “activities of head offices.”11 Its 2025 accounts identify L. Perlman SECS as immediate and ultimate parent and controlling party. The filed corporate architecture records Leslie Perlman as general partner of L. Perlman SECS and Yellowwoods Holdings S.a r.l. as its limited partner at formation; these records do not establish current trust beneficiaries or an Israeli ownership connection.13, 14, 20

The statutory control map records NGHL’s control of Nando’s Group Limited, Nando’s Finance Limited, Nando’s Chickenland Limited, Nando’s Restaurant Group Holdings Limited, Nando’s Grocery International Limited, and Nando’s Limited at documented thresholds. This register-based map is not proof that it is the complete worldwide group structure or that each relationship is 100% ownership.15, 21

Nando’s Chickenland Limited is the UK website and app operator and is classified for restaurant activity.22 Historical sources establish an Israeli franchise relationship and later reported local ownership, rather than a verified wholly owned Israeli subsidiary. No official Israeli corporate-register extract was obtained for the entity styled “Nando’s Chickenland (Israel) Ltd.”; its ownership, current trading status, group affiliation, and any relationship to NGHL remain unresolved.23

Domain Summaries

Military: Military

Mechanism of Involvement

No public evidence identified of contracts, tenders, procurement awards, framework agreements, defence-directory listings, or official announcements linking Nando’s or NGHL to the Israeli Ministry of Defense, IDF, Israel Prison Service, Border Police, or other Israeli security bodies.8, 9, 10 No public evidence identified of weapons, munitions, military-specified products, dual-use equipment, defence-prime supply, export licences, or logistical/base-support services.8, 10

Historical Israeli franchise reporting describes civilian restaurant activity. It does not document services to military bases, settlements, detention facilities, or security installations.1, 18

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The strongest defence is the company’s civilian restaurant character and the absence, in the reviewed public record, of any verified defence or security customer relationship. Nando’s public materials describe restaurant and franchise operations rather than defence or industrial products.8, 4

The absence findings are bounded: official pages, selected directories, and reviewed UN, OHCHR, PAX, Al-Haq, and related materials do not identify Nando’s, but this does not exclude non-public procurement, unreviewed records, or historical arrangements outside the source set.5, 6, 8, 9

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Digital: Digital

Mechanism of Involvement

Documented technologies concern ordinary restaurant operations: payment-risk assessment in Australia/New Zealand; online-order fraud prevention, customer data processing, Wi-Fi, CCTV, and loyalty systems in the UK/ROI; and cloud-based restaurant-management and delivery-platform integration in the UAE.24, 25, 26, 27, 28 The cited materials do not identify facial recognition, Israeli-origin technology components, Israeli hosting, Israeli jurisdictional access, or use connected to Israeli state bodies.24, 25, 26, 27, 28

No public evidence identified of a relationship with named Israeli-origin enterprise-technology, surveillance, biometric, cyber, AI, or cloud vendors; an Israeli R&D centre; Project Nimbus participation; or provision of technology to Israeli military, intelligence, police, or other security bodies.24, 25, 26, 27, 28

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The strongest defence is that the documented systems are commercial restaurant, payment, delivery, customer-service, and fraud-prevention tools, with no evidenced connection to Israeli security, population surveillance, targeting, or military effects.24, 25, 26

Public privacy policies permit certain cross-border processing, but do not name every cloud provider, processing location, subprocessor, or vendor. Accordingly, the audit’s negative conclusion is evidence-bounded and does not purport to reveal non-public vendor arrangements or infrastructure.25, 26

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Economic: Economic

Mechanism of Involvement

The evidence-supported economic nexus is historical Israeli franchise activity. Sources report Israeli outlets in the 1990s, a proposed 1997–98 expansion, and a reported 2005 local-network sale. A 2007 report described an asserted royalty claim equal to 1% of Israeli restaurant turnover; it is not evidence that any royalties were actually paid.1, 16, 2, 3

NGHL’s 2025 direct-investment schedule names subsidiaries or investees in the UK, Australia, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand, Malaysia, and Singapore, but does not list an Israel-domiciled direct subsidiary or investee. This company-level note cannot exclude lower-tier entities, franchisees, or other unlisted relationships.14

No public evidence identified of direct Israeli agricultural sourcing, Israeli importer-of-record arrangements, settlement-origin procurement, Israeli factories, data centres, logistics assets, Israel Bonds, Israel-focused funds, or post-2020 Israeli operations.5, 6, 14

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The strongest defence is that the available evidence points to a historical, disputed franchise relationship rather than verified continuing investment or economic contribution. The reported 2005 local sale, 2007 injunction, and Israel’s absence from the current country locator all weigh against treating historical reports as evidence of present operations.4, 2, 17

Conversely, closure timing, legal status, ownership history, completed investment amounts, and actual royalty flows remain unresolved because no primary franchise agreement, final court record, Israeli registry extract, or audited Israel-attributed accounts were retrieved.3, 17, 23

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Political: Political

Mechanism of Involvement

No public evidence identified of an official Nando’s statement on Israel, Palestine, Gaza, 7 October, or Israeli or Palestinian civilian harm.30 No public evidence identified of political spending, lobbying, anti-BDS advocacy, donations to Israeli military-welfare or settlement organisations, state partnerships, or conflict-related mobilisation of corporate assets.5, 7, 30

The reported 2004 Bnei Sakhnin sponsorship was commercial football sponsorship. It does not establish a state partnership, military programme, settlement relationship, or state public-relations campaign.19

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The strongest defence is the absence of identified political or state-aligned conduct in the reviewed public record, alongside the company’s non-state, restaurant-business character. A historical biographical reference to a former Israeli manager’s IDF commission resignation does not demonstrate corporate military or political activity.18

Negative findings are limited to the reviewed guides, databases, reporting, and searches. Absence from the BDS priority-target guide does not establish that no unaffiliated local campaign or social-media allegation has existed.7, 30

Named Entities and Evidence Map

BDS-1000 Score (V4)

Scoring method used for this release: V6.4 fixed-three evidence panels with bound examiner adjudication. The V4 wording in this section heading is retained solely for repository compatibility.

DomainIMPV-Domain Score
Military0.000.000.000.00
Digital0.000.000.000.00
Economic3.500.007.500.00
Political0.000.000.000.00

Economic records a direct historical franchise/IP relationship at I=3.50 and P=7.50. Its domain value is nevertheless zero because the relationship is inactive and therefore has current magnitude M=0.00. All other domains have no verified evidence of qualifying conduct, leaving V_MAX at 0.00 and resulting in Tier E (Minimal).

The V6.4 method is scale-free: it considers Impact by activity type, magnitude/scale, and directness/proximity, applies evidence-only thresholds, and incorporates examiner review of attribution, divestment, closure, and verification limits.

Methodology Note

Footnotes

  1. https://history.telfed.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/1994_jan.pdf ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  2. https://www.globes.co.il/news/article.aspx?did=1000038287 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  3. https://www.globes.co.il/news/article.aspx?did=1000266167 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8

  4. https://www.nandos.com/world/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  5. https://docs.un.org/en/A/HRC/59/23 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8

  6. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/hrcouncil/sessions-regular/session31/database-hrc3136/23-06-30-Update-israeli-settlement-opt-database-hrc3136.pdf ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  7. https://bdsmovement.net/Guide-to-BDS-Boycott ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  8. https://www.nandos.com/faqs/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  9. https://mod.gov.il/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  10. https://www.idf.il/%D7%90%D7%AA%D7%A8%D7%99-%D7%99%D7%97%D7%99%D7%93%D7%95%D7%AA/%D7%9E%D7%A2%D7%A8%D7%9A-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%96%D7%95%D7%9F/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  11. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/06451677 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  12. https://www.nandos.com/heritage/our-story/ ↩ ↩2

  13. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/06451677/persons-with-significant-control ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  14. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/06451677/filing-history/MzQ5MDM3MzI0MmFkaXF6a2N4/document?download=0&format=pdf ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  15. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/06530077/persons-with-significant-control ↩ ↩2

  16. https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-358524 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  17. https://www.globes.co.il/news/article.aspx?did=1000285774 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6

  18. https://history.telfed.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/2002_july.pdf ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  19. https://www.globes.co.il/news/article.aspx?did=823780 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  20. https://memorialc.public.lu/memorial/2010/C/Pdf/c1500227.pdf ↩ ↩2

  21. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09389199/persons-with-significant-control ↩

  22. https://www.nandos.co.uk/nandos-terms-and-conditions ↩

  23. https://next.obudget.org/i/org/company/511589905 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  24. https://www.adyen.com/press-and-media/nandos-serves-up-world-class-payment-experiences-with-adyen ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  25. https://www.nandos.co.uk/privacy-policy ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6

  26. https://www.nandos.com/privacy-policy/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  27. https://www.restroworks.com/customer/nandos/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  28. https://www.urbanpiper.com/case-study/nandos-uae ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  29. https://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3227197,00.html ↩

  30. https://www.whoprofits.org/publications/report/39 ↩ ↩2 ↩3