assignment of obligations under english law

Search for:

Jump straight to:

Please enter a search term

What sectors are you interested in?

We can use your selection to show you more of the content that you’re interested in.

Sign-up and we’ll remember your preferences

Sign-up to follow topics, sectors, people and also have the option to receive a weekly update of lastest news across your areas of interest.

Got an account already? Sign in

Want to speak to an advisor from your closest office?

Out-law / your daily need-to-know.

Out-Law Guide 4 min. read

Assignment and novation

19 Aug 2011, 4:40 pm

Assignment involves the transfer of an interest or benefit from one person to another. However the 'burden', or obligations, under a contract cannot be transferred.

Assignment in construction contracts

As noted above only the benefits of a contract can be assigned - not the burden. In the context of a building contract:

• the employer may assign its right to have the works constructed, and its right to sue the contractor in the event that the works are defective – but not its obligation to pay for the works;
• the contractor may assign its right to payment of the contract sum - but not its obligation to construct the works in accordance with the building contract or its obligation to meet any valid claims, for example for defects.

After assignment, the assignee is entitled to the benefit of the contract and to bring proceedings against the other contracting party to enforce its rights. The assignor still owes obligations to the other contracting party, and will remain liable to perform any part of the contract that still has to be fulfilled since the burden cannot be assigned. In practice, what usually happens is that the assignee takes over the performance of the contract with effect from assignment and the assignor will generally ask to be indemnified against any breach or failure to perform by the assignee.  The assignor will remain liable for any past liabilities incurred before the assignment.

In construction contracts, the issue of assignment often arises in looking at whether collateral warranties granted to parties outside of the main construction contract can be assigned.

Funders may require the developer to assign contractual rights against the contractor and the design team as security to the funder, as well as the benefit of performance bonds and parent company guarantees. The developer may assign such rights to the purchaser either during or after completion of the construction phase.

Contractual assignment provisions

Many contracts exclude or qualify the right to assignment, and the courts have confirmed that a clause which provides that a party to a contract may not assign the benefit of that contract without the consent of the other party is legally effective and will extend to all rights and benefits arising under the contract, including the right to any remedies. Other common qualifications on the right to assign include:

• a restriction on assignment without the consent of the other party, whether or not such consent is not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed;
• only one of the parties may assign;
• only certain rights may be assigned – for example, warranties and indemnities may be excluded;
• a limit on the number of assignments - as is almost always the case in respect of collateral warranties;
• a right to assign only to a named assignee or class of assignee.

Note that in some agreements where there is a prohibition on assignment, it is sometimes possible to find the reservation of specific rights to create a trust or establish security over the subject matter of the agreement instead.

Legal and equitable assignment

The Law of Property Act creates the ability to legally assign a debt or any other chose in action where the debtor, trustee or other relevant person is notified in writing. If the assignment complied with the formalities in the Act it is a legal assignment, otherwise it will be an equitable assignment.

Some transfers can only take effect as an equitable assignment, for example:

• an oral assignment;
• an assignment by way of charge;
• an assignment of only part of the chosen in action;
• an assignment of which notice has not been given to the debtor;
• an agreement to assign.

If the assignment is equitable rather than legal, the assignor cannot enforce the assigned property in its own name and to do so must join the assignee in any action. This is designed to protect the debtor from later proceedings brought by the assignor or another assignee from enforcing the action without notice of the earlier assignment.

Security assignments

Using assignment as a way of taking security requires special care, as follows:

• if the assignment is by way of charge, the assignor retains the right to sue for any loss it suffers caused by a breach of the other contract party;
• if there is an outright assignment coupled with an entitlement to a re-assignment back once the secured obligation has been performed, it is an assignment by way of legal mortgage.

Please see our separate Out-Law guide for more information on types of security.

Restrictions on assignment

There are restrictions on the assignment of certain types of interest on public policy grounds, as follows:

• certain personal contracts – for example, a contract for the employment of a personal servant or for the benefit of a motor insurance policy cannot be assigned;
• a bare cause of action or 'right to sue' where the assignee has no commercial interest in the subject matter of the underlying transaction cannot be assigned;
• certain rights conferred by statute – for example, a liquidator's powers to bring wrongful trading proceedings against a director – cannot be assigned;
• an assignment of a contract may not necessarily transfer the benefit of an arbitration agreement contained in the contract;
• the assignment of certain rights is regulated – for example, the assignment of company shares or copyright.

If you want to transfer the burden of a contract as well as the benefits under it, you have to novate. Like assignment, novation transfers the benefits under a contract but unlike assignment, novation transfers the burden under a contract as well.

In a novation the original contract is extinguished and is replaced by a new one in which a third party takes up rights and obligations which duplicate those of one of the original parties to the contract. Novation does not cancel past rights and obligations under the original contract, although the parties can agree to novate these as well.

Novation is only possible with the consent of the original contracting parties as well as the new party. Consideration (the 'price' paid, whether financial or otherwise, by the new party in return for the contract being novated to it) must be provided for this new contract unless the novation is documented in a deed signed by all three parties.

• Construction Contracts
• Construction
• Government and public sector
• Real Estate
• Technology, Science & Industry
• United Kingdom

Contact an adviser

Graham Alty

Latest News

What the ‘faster’ tax reforms could mean for eu investors, changes to nsw work health and safety legislation an important reminder for organisations, irish businesses must act now to navigate the impact of ai and the eu ai act, ‘fixed establishment’ concept clarified in eu vat ruling, dora standards should spur contract remediation work, say experts, don't miss a thing.

Sign-up to receive the latest news, analysis and events direct to your e-mail inbox

You might also like

Out-Law News

European Commission sets out plans for future connectivity

The European Commission has set out plans to improve telecommunications and digital infrastructure across the bloc in the coming years, starting with the next legislative term.

UK Budget 2024: general election battle lines become clearer

The UK chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s Budget speech on Wednesday, and the response of Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer to it, provide an insight into how the forthcoming UK general election campaign will be fought, an expert in public policy has said.

UK announces Energy Charter Treaty withdrawal, citing need to focus on net zero strategy

The UK has announced that it will leave the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), due to what it described as the failure of efforts to align the Treaty with its net zero commitments.

UK government plans to revamp holiday pay calculation for part-year workers

Out-Law Analysis

Pensions disputes: managing member expectations paramount

UK subsidy control post-Brexit: access to effective judicial remedies

'Steps of court' settlement was not negligent, court rules

'Vast majority' of companies not seeking to avoid tax

'World first' industrial decarbonisation strategy developed in the UK

3D printing: UK product safety issues

5G potential for business highlighted in UK funding programme

Sectors and what we do

Sectors we work in.

• Financial Services
• Infrastructure
• Your assets
• Your company
• Your finance
• Your legal team and resource
• Your people
• Your risks and regulatory environment

Your privacy matters to us

We use cookies that are essential for our site to work. To improve our site, we would like to use additional cookies to help us understand how visitors use it, measure traffic to our site from social media platforms and to personalise your experience. Some of the cookies that we use are provided by third parties. To accept all cookies click ‘accept all’. To reject all optional cookies click ‘reject all’. To choose which optional cookies to allow click ‘cookie settings’. This tool uses a cookie to remember your choices. Please visit our cookie policy for more information.

• assignments basic law

Assignments: The Basic Law

The assignment of a right or obligation is a common contractual event under the law and the right to assign (or prohibition against assignments) is found in the majority of agreements, leases and business structural documents created in the United States.

As with many terms commonly used, people are familiar with the term but often are not aware or fully aware of what the terms entail. The concept of assignment of rights and obligations is one of those simple concepts with wide ranging ramifications in the contractual and business context and the law imposes severe restrictions on the validity and effect of assignment in many instances. Clear contractual provisions concerning assignments and rights should be in every document and structure created and this article will outline why such drafting is essential for the creation of appropriate and effective contracts and structures.

The reader should first read the article on Limited Liability Entities in the United States and Contracts since the information in those articles will be assumed in this article.

Basic Definitions and Concepts:

An assignment is the transfer of rights held by one party called the “assignor” to another party called the “assignee.” The legal nature of the assignment and the contractual terms of the agreement between the parties determines some additional rights and liabilities that accompany the assignment. The assignment of rights under a contract usually completely transfers the rights to the assignee to receive the benefits accruing under the contract. Ordinarily, the term assignment is limited to the transfer of rights that are intangible, like contractual rights and rights connected with property. Merchants Service Co. v. Small Claims Court , 35 Cal. 2d 109, 113-114 (Cal. 1950).

An assignment will generally be permitted under the law unless there is an express prohibition against assignment in the underlying contract or lease. Where assignments are permitted, the assignor need not consult the other party to the contract but may merely assign the rights at that time. However, an assignment cannot have any adverse effect on the duties of the other party to the contract, nor can it diminish the chance of the other party receiving complete performance. The assignor normally remains liable unless there is an agreement to the contrary by the other party to the contract.

The effect of a valid assignment is to remove privity between the assignor and the obligor and create privity between the obligor and the assignee. Privity is usually defined as a direct and immediate contractual relationship. See Merchants case above.

Further, for the assignment to be effective in most jurisdictions, it must occur in the present. One does not normally assign a future right; the assignment vests immediate rights and obligations.

No specific language is required to create an assignment so long as the assignor makes clear his/her intent to assign identified contractual rights to the assignee. Since expensive litigation can erupt from ambiguous or vague language, obtaining the correct verbiage is vital. An agreement must manifest the intent to transfer rights and can either be oral or in writing and the rights assigned must be certain.

Note that an assignment of an interest is the transfer of some identifiable property, claim, or right from the assignor to the assignee. The assignment operates to transfer to the assignee all of the rights, title, or interest of the assignor in the thing assigned. A transfer of all rights, title, and interests conveys everything that the assignor owned in the thing assigned and the assignee stands in the shoes of the assignor. Knott v. McDonald’s Corp ., 985 F. Supp. 1222 (N.D. Cal. 1997)

The parties must intend to effectuate an assignment at the time of the transfer, although no particular language or procedure is necessary. As long ago as the case of National Reserve Co. v. Metropolitan Trust Co ., 17 Cal. 2d 827 (Cal. 1941), the court held that in determining what rights or interests pass under an assignment, the intention of the parties as manifested in the instrument is controlling.

The intent of the parties to an assignment is a question of fact to be derived not only from the instrument executed by the parties but also from the surrounding circumstances. When there is no writing to evidence the intention to transfer some identifiable property, claim, or right, it is necessary to scrutinize the surrounding circumstances and parties’ acts to ascertain their intentions. Strosberg v. Brauvin Realty Servs., 295 Ill. App. 3d 17 (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. 1998)

The general rule applicable to assignments of choses in action is that an assignment, unless there is a contract to the contrary, carries with it all securities held by the assignor as collateral to the claim and all rights incidental thereto and vests in the assignee the equitable title to such collateral securities and incidental rights. An unqualified assignment of a contract or chose in action, however, with no indication of the intent of the parties, vests in the assignee the assigned contract or chose and all rights and remedies incidental thereto.

More examples: In Strosberg v. Brauvin Realty Servs ., 295 Ill. App. 3d 17 (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. 1998), the court held that the assignee of a party to a subordination agreement is entitled to the benefits and is subject to the burdens of the agreement. In Florida E. C. R. Co. v. Eno , 99 Fla. 887 (Fla. 1930), the court held that the mere assignment of all sums due in and of itself creates no different or other liability of the owner to the assignee than that which existed from the owner to the assignor.

And note that even though an assignment vests in the assignee all rights, remedies, and contingent benefits which are incidental to the thing assigned, those which are personal to the assignor and for his sole benefit are not assigned. Rasp v. Hidden Valley Lake, Inc ., 519 N.E.2d 153, 158 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988). Thus, if the underlying agreement provides that a service can only be provided to X, X cannot assign that right to Y.

Novation Compared to Assignment:

Although the difference between a novation and an assignment may appear narrow, it is an essential one. “Novation is a act whereby one party transfers all its obligations and benefits under a contract to a third party.” In a novation, a third party successfully substitutes the original party as a party to the contract. “When a contract is novated, the other contracting party must be left in the same position he was in prior to the novation being made.”

A sublease is the transfer when a tenant retains some right of reentry onto the leased premises. However, if the tenant transfers the entire leasehold estate, retaining no right of reentry or other reversionary interest, then the transfer is an assignment. The assignor is normally also removed from liability to the landlord only if the landlord consents or allowed that right in the lease. In a sublease, the original tenant is not released from the obligations of the original lease.

Equitable Assignments:

An equitable assignment is one in which one has a future interest and is not valid at law but valid in a court of equity. In National Bank of Republic v. United Sec. Life Ins. & Trust Co. , 17 App. D.C. 112 (D.C. Cir. 1900), the court held that to constitute an equitable assignment of a chose in action, the following has to occur generally: anything said written or done, in pursuance of an agreement and for valuable consideration, or in consideration of an antecedent debt, to place a chose in action or fund out of the control of the owner, and appropriate it to or in favor of another person, amounts to an equitable assignment. Thus, an agreement, between a debtor and a creditor, that the debt shall be paid out of a specific fund going to the debtor may operate as an equitable assignment.

In Egyptian Navigation Co. v. Baker Invs. Corp. , 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30804 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 14, 2008), the court stated that an equitable assignment occurs under English law when an assignor, with an intent to transfer his/her right to a chose in action, informs the assignee about the right so transferred.

An executory agreement or a declaration of trust are also equitable assignments if unenforceable as assignments by a court of law but enforceable by a court of equity exercising sound discretion according to the circumstances of the case. Since California combines courts of equity and courts of law, the same court would hear arguments as to whether an equitable assignment had occurred. Quite often, such relief is granted to avoid fraud or unjust enrichment.

Note that obtaining an assignment through fraudulent means invalidates the assignment. Fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters. It vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments. Walker v. Rich , 79 Cal. App. 139 (Cal. App. 1926). If an assignment is made with the fraudulent intent to delay, hinder, and defraud creditors, then it is void as fraudulent in fact. See our article on Transfers to Defraud Creditors .

But note that the motives that prompted an assignor to make the transfer will be considered as immaterial and will constitute no defense to an action by the assignee, if an assignment is considered as valid in all other respects.

Enforceability of Assignments:

Whether a right under a contract is capable of being transferred is determined by the law of the place where the contract was entered into. The validity and effect of an assignment is determined by the law of the place of assignment. The validity of an assignment of a contractual right is governed by the law of the state with the most significant relationship to the assignment and the parties.

In some jurisdictions, the traditional conflict of laws rules governing assignments has been rejected and the law of the place having the most significant contacts with the assignment applies. In Downs v. American Mut. Liability Ins. Co ., 14 N.Y.2d 266 (N.Y. 1964), a wife and her husband separated and the wife obtained a judgment of separation from the husband in New York. The judgment required the husband to pay a certain yearly sum to the wife. The husband assigned 50 percent of his future salary, wages, and earnings to the wife. The agreement authorized the employer to make such payments to the wife.

After the husband moved from New York, the wife learned that he was employed by an employer in Massachusetts. She sent the proper notice and demanded payment under the agreement. The employer refused and the wife brought an action for enforcement. The court observed that Massachusetts did not prohibit assignment of the husband’s wages. Moreover, Massachusetts law was not controlling because New York had the most significant relationship with the assignment. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of the wife.

Therefore, the validity of an assignment is determined by looking to the law of the forum with the most significant relationship to the assignment itself. To determine the applicable law of assignments, the court must look to the law of the state which is most significantly related to the principal issue before it.

Assignment of Contractual Rights:

Generally, the law allows the assignment of a contractual right unless the substitution of rights would materially change the duty of the obligor, materially increase the burden or risk imposed on the obligor by the contract, materially impair the chance of obtaining return performance, or materially reduce the value of the performance to the obligor. Restat 2d of Contracts, § 317(2)(a). This presumes that the underlying agreement is silent on the right to assign.

If the contract specifically precludes assignment, the contractual right is not assignable. Whether a contract is assignable is a matter of contractual intent and one must look to the language used by the parties to discern that intent.

In the absence of an express provision to the contrary, the rights and duties under a bilateral executory contract that does not involve personal skill, trust, or confidence may be assigned without the consent of the other party. But note that an assignment is invalid if it would materially alter the other party’s duties and responsibilities. Once an assignment is effective, the assignee stands in the shoes of the assignor and assumes all of assignor’s rights. Hence, after a valid assignment, the assignor’s right to performance is extinguished, transferred to assignee, and the assignee possesses the same rights, benefits, and remedies assignor once possessed. Robert Lamb Hart Planners & Architects v. Evergreen, Ltd. , 787 F. Supp. 753 (S.D. Ohio 1992).

On the other hand, an assignee’s right against the obligor is subject to “all of the limitations of the assignor’s right, all defenses thereto, and all set-offs and counterclaims which would have been available against the assignor had there been no assignment, provided that these defenses and set-offs are based on facts existing at the time of the assignment.” See Robert Lamb , case, above.

The power of the contract to restrict assignment is broad. Usually, contractual provisions that restrict assignment of the contract without the consent of the obligor are valid and enforceable, even when there is statutory authorization for the assignment. The restriction of the power to assign is often ineffective unless the restriction is expressly and precisely stated. Anti-assignment clauses are effective only if they contain clear, unambiguous language of prohibition. Anti-assignment clauses protect only the obligor and do not affect the transaction between the assignee and assignor.

Usually, a prohibition against the assignment of a contract does not prevent an assignment of the right to receive payments due, unless circumstances indicate the contrary. Moreover, the contracting parties cannot, by a mere non-assignment provision, prevent the effectual alienation of the right to money which becomes due under the contract.

A contract provision prohibiting or restricting an assignment may be waived, or a party may so act as to be estopped from objecting to the assignment, such as by effectively ratifying the assignment. The power to void an assignment made in violation of an anti-assignment clause may be waived either before or after the assignment. See our article on Contracts.

Noncompete Clauses and Assignments:

Of critical import to most buyers of businesses is the ability to ensure that key employees of the business being purchased cannot start a competing company. Some states strictly limit such clauses, some do allow them. California does restrict noncompete clauses, only allowing them under certain circumstances. A common question in those states that do allow them is whether such rights can be assigned to a new party, such as the buyer of the buyer.

A covenant not to compete, also called a non-competitive clause, is a formal agreement prohibiting one party from performing similar work or business within a designated area for a specified amount of time. This type of clause is generally included in contracts between employer and employee and contracts between buyer and seller of a business.

Many workers sign a covenant not to compete as part of the paperwork required for employment. It may be a separate document similar to a non-disclosure agreement, or buried within a number of other clauses in a contract. A covenant not to compete is generally legal and enforceable, although there are some exceptions and restrictions.

Whenever a company recruits skilled employees, it invests a significant amount of time and training. For example, it often takes years before a research chemist or a design engineer develops a workable knowledge of a company’s product line, including trade secrets and highly sensitive information. Once an employee gains this knowledge and experience, however, all sorts of things can happen. The employee could work for the company until retirement, accept a better offer from a competing company or start up his or her own business.

A covenant not to compete may cover a number of potential issues between employers and former employees. Many companies spend years developing a local base of customers or clients. It is important that this customer base not fall into the hands of local competitors. When an employee signs a covenant not to compete, he or she usually agrees not to use insider knowledge of the company’s customer base to disadvantage the company. The covenant not to compete often defines a broad geographical area considered off-limits to former employees, possibly tens or hundreds of miles.

Another area of concern covered by a covenant not to compete is a potential ‘brain drain’. Some high-level former employees may seek to recruit others from the same company to create new competition. Retention of employees, especially those with unique skills or proprietary knowledge, is vital for most companies, so a covenant not to compete may spell out definite restrictions on the hiring or recruiting of employees.

A covenant not to compete may also define a specific amount of time before a former employee can seek employment in a similar field. Many companies offer a substantial severance package to make sure former employees are financially solvent until the terms of the covenant not to compete have been met.

Because the use of a covenant not to compete can be controversial, a handful of states, including California, have largely banned this type of contractual language. The legal enforcement of these agreements falls on individual states, and many have sided with the employee during arbitration or litigation. A covenant not to compete must be reasonable and specific, with defined time periods and coverage areas. If the agreement gives the company too much power over former employees or is ambiguous, state courts may declare it to be overbroad and therefore unenforceable. In such case, the employee would be free to pursue any employment opportunity, including working for a direct competitor or starting up a new company of his or her own.

It has been held that an employee’s covenant not to compete is assignable where one business is transferred to another, that a merger does not constitute an assignment of a covenant not to compete, and that a covenant not to compete is enforceable by a successor to the employer where the assignment does not create an added burden of employment or other disadvantage to the employee. However, in some states such as Hawaii, it has also been held that a covenant not to compete is not assignable and under various statutes for various reasons that such covenants are not enforceable against an employee by a successor to the employer. Hawaii v. Gannett Pac. Corp. , 99 F. Supp. 2d 1241 (D. Haw. 1999)

It is vital to obtain the relevant law of the applicable state before drafting or attempting to enforce assignment rights in this particular area.

Conclusion:

In the current business world of fast changing structures, agreements, employees and projects, the ability to assign rights and obligations is essential to allow flexibility and adjustment to new situations. Conversely, the ability to hold a contracting party into the deal may be essential for the future of a party. Thus, the law of assignments and the restriction on same is a critical aspect of every agreement and every structure. This basic provision is often glanced at by the contracting parties, or scribbled into the deal at the last minute but can easily become the most vital part of the transaction.

As an example, one client of ours came into the office outraged that his co venturer on a sizable exporting agreement, who had excellent connections in Brazil, had elected to pursue another venture instead and assigned the agreement to a party unknown to our client and without the business contacts our client considered vital. When we examined the handwritten agreement our client had drafted in a restaurant in Sao Paolo, we discovered there was no restriction on assignment whatsoever…our client had not even considered that right when drafting the agreement after a full day of work.

One choses who one does business with carefully…to ensure that one’s choice remains the party on the other side of the contract, one must master the ability to negotiate proper assignment provisions.

Founded in 1939, our law firm combines the ability to represent clients in domestic or international matters with the personal interaction with clients that is traditional to a long established law firm.

Read more about our firm

© 2024, Stimmel, Stimmel & Roeser, All rights reserved  | Terms of Use | Site by Bay Design

Deed of Assignment or Deed of Novation: Key Differences and Legal Implications of Novation and Assignment Contracts

Novation and assignment stand out as pivotal processes for the transfer of contractual rights and obligations. These legal concepts allow a party to the contract to adapt to changing circumstances, ensuring that business arrangements remain relevant and effective. This article explores the nuances of novation and assignment, shedding light on their distinct legal implications, procedures, and practical applications. Whether you’re a business owner navigating the transfer of service contracts, or an individual looking to understand your rights and responsibilities in a contractual relationship, or a key stakeholder in a construction contract, this guide will equip you with the essential knowledge to navigate these complex legal processes.

Table of Contents

• What is a Deed of Novation? 
• What is a Deed of Assignment? 

Key Differences Between Novation and Assignment Deeds

Need a deed of novation or assignment key factors to consider, selecting the right assignment clause for your contract – helping you make the right choice, what is a deed of novation.

Novation is a legal process that allows a new party to a contract to take the place of an original party in a contract, thereby transferring both the responsibilities and benefits under the contract to a third party. In common law, transferring contractual obligations through novation requires the agreement of all original parties involved in the contract, as well as the new party. This is because novation effectively terminates the original contract and establishes a new one.

A novation clause typically specifies that a contract cannot be novated without the written consent of the current parties. The inclusion of such a clause aims to preclude the possibility of novation based on verbal consent or inferred from the actions of a continuing party. Nevertheless, courts will assess the actual events that transpired, and a novation clause may not always be enforceable. It’s possible for a novation clause to allow for future novation by one party acting alone to a party of their choosing. Courts will enforce a novation carried out in this manner if it is sanctioned by the correct interpretation of the original contract.

Novation is frequently encountered in business and contract law, offering a means for parties to transfer their contractual rights and duties to another, which can be useful if the original party cannot meet their obligations or wishes to transfer their contract rights. For novation to occur, there must be unanimous consent for the substitution of the new party for the original one, necessitating a three-way agreement among the original party, the new party, and the remaining contract party. Moreover, the novation agreement must be documented in writing and signed by all involved parties. Understanding novation is essential in the realms of contracts and business dealings, as it provides a way for parties to delegate their contractual rights and responsibilities while freeing themselves from the original agreement.

What is a Deed of Assignment?

A deed of assignment is a legal document that facilitates the transfer of a specific right or benefit from one party (the assignor) to another (the assignee). This process allows the assignee to step into the assignor’s position, taking over both the rights and obligations under the original contract. In construction, this might occur when a main contractor assigns rights under a subcontract to the employer, allowing the employer to enforce specific subcontractor duties directly if the contractor fails.

Key aspects of an assignment include:

• Continuation of the Original Contract: The initial agreement remains valid and enforceable, despite the transfer of rights or benefits.
• Assumption of Rights and Obligations: The assignee assumes the role of the assignor, adopting all associated rights and responsibilities as outlined in the original contract.
• Requirement for Written Form: The assignment must be documented in writing, signed by the assignor, and officially communicated to the obligor (the party obligated under the contract).
• Subject to Terms and Law: The ability to assign rights or benefits is governed by the specific terms of the contract and relevant legal statutes.

At common law, parties generally have the right to assign their contractual rights without needing consent from the other party involved in the contract. However, this does not apply if the rights are inherently personal or if the contract includes an assignment clause that restricts or modifies this general right. Many contracts contain a provision requiring the consent of the other party for an assignment to occur, ensuring that rights are not transferred without the other party’s knowledge.

Once an assignment of rights is made, the assignee gains the right to benefit from the contract and can initiate legal proceedings to enforce these rights. This enforcement can be done either independently or alongside the assignor, depending on whether the assignment is legal or equitable. It’s important to note that while rights under the contract can be assigned, the contractual obligations or burdens cannot be transferred in this manner. Therefore, the assignor remains liable for any obligations under the contract that are not yet fulfilled at the time of the assignment.

Choosing Between Assignment and Novation in a Construction Contract

Choosing between a deed of novation and an assignment agreement depends on the specific circumstances and objectives of the parties involved in a contract. Both options serve to transfer rights and obligations but in fundamentally different ways, each with its own legal implications, risks, and benefits. Understanding these differences and considering various factors can help in making an informed decision that aligns with your goals.

The choice between assignment and novation in a construction project scenario, where, for instance, an employer wishes to engage a subcontractor directly due to loss of confidence in the main contractor, hinges on several factors. These are:

• Nature of the Contract:  The type of contract you’re dealing with (e.g., service, sales) can influence which option is more suitable. For instance, novation might be preferred for service contracts where obligations are personal and specific to the original parties.
• Parties Involved: Consent is a key factor. Novation requires the agreement of all original and new parties, making it a viable option only when such consent is attainable. Assignment might be more feasible if obtaining consent from all parties poses a challenge.
• Complexity of the Transaction: For transactions involving multiple parties and obligations, novation could be more appropriate as it ensures a clean transfer of all rights and obligations. Assignment might leave the original party with ongoing responsibilities.
• Time and Cost: Consider the practical aspects, such as the time and financial cost associated with each option. Novation typically involves more complex legal processes and might be more time-consuming and costly than an assignment.

If the intention is merely to transfer the rights of the subcontractor’s work to the employer without altering the subcontractor’s obligations under a contract, an assignment might suffice. However, if the goal is to completely transfer the main contractor’s contractual role and obligations to the employer or another entity, novation would be necessary, ensuring that all parties consent to this new arrangement and the original contractor is released from their obligations.

The legal interpretations and court decisions highlight the importance of the document’s substance over its label. Even if a document is titled a “Deed of Assignment,” it could function as a novation if it transfers obligations and responsibilities and involves the consent of all parties. The key is to clearly understand and define the objective behind changing the contractual relationships and to use a deed — assignment or novation — that best achieves the desired legal and practical outcomes, ensuring the continuity and successful completion of the construction project.

Understanding the distinction between assignment deeds and novation deeds is crucial for anyone involved in contractual agreements. Novation offers a clean slate by transferring both rights and obligations to a new party, requiring the consent of all involved. Assignment, conversely, allows for the transfer of contractual benefits without altering the original contract’s obligations. Each method serves different strategic purposes, from simplifying transitions to preserving original contractual duties. The choice between novation and assignment hinges on specific legal, financial, and practical considerations unique to each situation. At PBL Law Group, we specialise in providing comprehensive legal advice and support in contract law. Our team is dedicated to helping clients understand their options and make informed decisions that align with their legal and business objectives. Let’s discuss!

Authored By Raea Khan

Director Lawyer, PBL Law Group

Find what you need

Share this article, book a 15-min consultation​, rated 5-star by our clients, latest insights & practical guides.

Guide to Successful Termination of Your Building Contract – Best Practices to Terminate a Building Contract

Navigating the complexities of building contracts is a vital aspect

Tenant Rent Arrears: Options for Landlords in NSW When Tenants Stop Paying Rent

In the landscape of residential leasing in New South Wales,

Understanding the Legal Obligations of NSW Owner Builders

In New South Wales, taking on the role of an

Speak to us Now or Request a Consultation.

How can our expert lawyers help.

Property and strata disputes, building defects claims, setting up new Owners Corporations and more…

Construction & Building Law

Construction and building disputes, building defects, delays and claims, debt recovery and more…

International Estate Planning

Cross-border estate planning, international wills and trusts, tax-efficient wealth transfer strategies and more…

Commercial & Business Law

Starting and scaling your business, banking and business financing, bankruptcy and insolvency and more…

Planning & Environment Law

Environment and planning regulation, land and environment court disputes, sub-divisions and more…

Wills & Estates

Creating, updating and contesting wills, estate planning and administration, probate applications and more…

Get In Touch

Helpful links, site information, how we can help.

Copyright © 2024 PBL Law Group. All Rights Reserved

Thank You For Your Request.

We’ve received your consultation request and will contact you within the next 24 hours (excluding weekends).

Assignment vs Novation: Everything You Need to Know

Assignment vs. novation: What's the difference? An assignment agreement transfers one party's rights and obligations under a contract to another party. 4 min read updated on February 01, 2023

Assignment vs. novation: What's the difference? An assignment agreement transfers one party's rights and obligations under a contract to another party. The party transferring their rights and duties is the assignor; the party receiving them is the assignee. Novation is a mechanism where one party transfers all its obligations and rights under a contract to a third party, with the consent of the original counterparty.

The transfer of a benefit or interest from one party to another is referred to as an assignment. While the benefits can be transferred, the obligation or burden behind the contract cannot be. A contract assignment occurs when a party assigns their contractual rights to a third party. The benefit that the issuing party would have received from the contract is now assigned to the third party. The party appointing their rights is referred to as the assignor, while the party obtaining the rights is the assignee. 

The assignor continues to carry the burden and can be held liable by the assignee for failing to fulfill their duties under the contract. Purchasing an indemnity clause from the assignee may help protect the assignor from a future liability. Unlike notation, assignment contracts do not annul the initial agreement and do not establish a new agreement. The original or initial contract continues to be enforced. 

Assignment contracts generally do not require the authorization from all parties in the agreement. Based on the terms, the assignor will most likely only need to notify the nonassigning party.

In regards to a contract being assignable, if an agreement seems silent or unclear, courts have decided that the contract is typically assignable. However, this does not apply to personal service contracts where consent is mandatory. The Supreme Court of Canada , or SCC, has determined that a personal service contract must be created for the original parties based on the special characteristics, skills, or confidences that are uniquely displayed between them. Many times, the courts need to intervene to determine whether an agreement is indeed a personal service contract.

Overall, assignment is more convenient for the assignor than novation. The assignor is not required to ask for approval from a third party in order to assign their interest in an agreement to the assignee. The assignor should be aware of the potential liability risk if the assignee doesn't perform their duties as stated in the assigned contract.

Novation has the potential to limit future liabilities to an assignor, but it also is usually more burdensome for the parties involved. Additionally, it's not always achievable if a third party refuses to give consent.

It's essential for the two parties in an agreement to appraise their relationship before transitioning to novation. An assignment is preferential for parties that would like to continue performing their obligations, but also transition some of their rights to another party.

A novation occurs when a party would like to transfer both the benefits and the burden within a contract to another party. Similar to assignment, the benefits are transferred, but unlike assignment, the burden is also transferred. When a novation is completed, the original contract is deleted and is replaced with a new one. In this new contract, a third party is now responsible for the obligations and rights. Generally, novation does not cancel any past obligations or rights under the initial contract, although it is possible to novate these as well.

Novation needs to be approved by both parties of the original contract and the new joining third party. Some amount of consideration must also be provided in the new contract in order for it to be novated, unless the novation is cited in a deed that is signed by all parties to the contract. In this situation, consideration is referring to something of value that is being gained through the contract.

Novation occurs when the purchaser to the original agreement is attempting to replace the seller of an original contract. Once novated, the original seller is released from any obligation under the initial contract. The SCC has established a three-point test to implement novation. The asserting party must prove:

• The purchaser accepts complete liability
• The creditor to the original contract accepts the purchaser as the official debtor, and not simply as a guarantor or agent of the seller
• The creditor to the original contract accepts the new contract as the replacement for the old one

Also, the SSC insisted that if a new agreement doesn't exist, the court would not find novation unless the precedence was unusually compelling.

If you need help determining if assignment vs. novation is best for you, you can  post your job  on UpCounsel's marketplace. UpCounsel accepts only the top 5 percent of lawyers to its site. Lawyers on UpCounsel come from law schools such as Harvard Law and Yale Law and average 14 years of legal experience, including work with or on behalf of companies like Google, Menlo Ventures, and Airbnb.

Hire the top business lawyers and save up to 60% on legal fees

Content Approved by UpCounsel

• Contract Transfer
• Novation Agreement
• What is Novation of Contract
• Novation of Contract
• Contract Novation Letter
• Deed of Novation
• Contract Novation
• Loan Novation Agreement
• Assignment of Rights Example
• Contract Novation Agreement

Primary tabs

Assignment is a legal term whereby an individual, the “assignor,” transfers rights, property, or other benefits to another known as the “ assignee .”   This concept is used in both contract and property law.  The term can refer to either the act of transfer or the rights /property/benefits being transferred.

Contract Law   

Under contract law, assignment of a contract is both: (1) an assignment of rights; and (2) a delegation of duties , in the absence of evidence otherwise.  For example, if A contracts with B to teach B guitar for $50, A can assign this contract to C.  That is, this assignment is both: (1) an assignment of A’s rights under the contract to the $50; and (2) a delegation of A’s duty to teach guitar to C.  In this example, A is both the “assignor” and the “delegee” who d elegates the duties to another (C), C is known as the “ obligor ” who must perform the obligations to the assignee , and B is the “ assignee ” who is owed duties and is liable to the “ obligor ”.

(1) Assignment of Rights/Duties Under Contract Law

There are a few notable rules regarding assignments under contract law.  First, if an individual has not yet secured the contract to perform duties to another, he/she cannot assign his/her future right to an assignee .  That is, if A has not yet contracted with B to teach B guitar, A cannot assign his/her rights to C.  Second, rights cannot be assigned when they materially change the obligor ’s duty and rights.  Third, the obligor can sue the assignee directly if the assignee does not pay him/her.  Following the previous example, this means that C ( obligor ) can sue B ( assignee ) if C teaches guitar to B, but B does not pay C $50 in return.

            (2) Delegation of Duties

If the promised performance requires a rare genius or skill, then the delegee cannot delegate it to the obligor.  It can only be delegated if the promised performance is more commonplace.  Further, an obligee can sue if the assignee does not perform.  However, the delegee is secondarily liable unless there has been an express release of the delegee.  That is, if B does want C to teach guitar but C refuses to, then B can sue C.  If C still refuses to perform, then B can compel A to fulfill the duties under secondary liability.

Lastly, a related concept is novation , which is when a new obligor substitutes and releases an old obligor.  If novation occurs, then the original obligor’s duties are wiped out. However, novation requires an original obligee’s consent .  

Property Law

Under property law, assignment typically arises in landlord-tenant situations.  For example, A might be renting from landlord B but wants to another party (C) to take over the property.   In this scenario, A might be able to choose between assigning and subleasing the property to C.  If assigning , A would be giving C the entire balance of the term, with no reversion to anyone whereas if subleasing , A would be giving C for a limited period of the remaining term.  Significantly, under assignment C would have privity of estate with the landlord while under a sublease, C would not. 

[Last updated in May of 2020 by the Wex Definitions Team ]

• business law
• landlord & tenant
• property & real estate law
• trusts, inheritances & estates
• wex definitions

Hall Ellis Solicitors

assignment of contract rights, novation and assignment clauses

Assignment of contract rights .

There is no such thing as an assignment of a contract.

It was held in Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd  1993 UKHL 4 (22 July 1993):

It is trite law that it is, in any event, impossible to assign "the contract" as a whole, i.e. including both burden and benefit. The burden of a contract can never be assigned without the consent of the other party to the contract in which event such consent will give rise to a novation. Although it is true that the phrase "assign this contract" is not strictly accurate, lawyers frequently use those words inaccurately to describe an assignment of the benefit of a contract since every lawyer knows that the burden of a contract cannot be assigned.

In short, contracts are not assigned:

• ownership of assets is assigned.
• Contractual rights are transferred. They're novated.

So when it comes to “assigning” (ie transferring or novating) contracts, there are 3 possibilities:

• Transfer all or part of the burden of the contract to another person. This is novation
• Assign all or part of the benefit of the contract to another person
• Transfer the whole of the benefit and the burden to another person. This is also novation.

The general law does not require any particular formality to novation.

Where a supplier notifies a contracting partner that they will be replaced by another supplier, and then starts to receive supply from the new supplier without objection or complaint, there's a good chance the contract has been novated.

That's acceptance of a new contract (and termination of the old contract) by conduct.

When businesses enter administration or liquidation, potential purchasers might express an interest in “acquiring the contracts” of the business. That requires novation of each contract, individually.

Novation is a fundamental principle of contract law, and is closely related to privity of contract . It's pretty difficult to understand one without the other.

What do "Assignment Clauses" in Contract do then?

Assignment clauses either:

• confirm the general operation of the law - ie no transfers of contractual rights. It expressly prohibits or enables transfers of the burden or the benefit of the contract.
• displace or override the general rule of law of novation, in favour of one party or both parties.

Do you need one or not?  That depends.

Context of Assignment Clauses

Contracts impose strict liability on the contracting parties to perform their legal obligations. 

It means this: if a seller does not perform what they are required to do under the contract to the standard fixed by the contract, they’re in breach of contract , and liable to make good on a legal remedy for breach.  Likewise, if a buyer does not do what they are legally required to do, they’re in breach of contract, and facing the same consequences .

For example, take a company supplying SaaS related services:

The SaaS supplier hosts its SaaS solution in the cloud for its customers.  The SaaS supplier doesn't own its own infrastructure for the hosting. It subcontracts the hosting to a dedicated hosting company, such as Rackspace. That subcontracting doesn't relieve the SaaS supplier from its obligations to perform the contract: in this example, host the SaaS solution in the cloud to its own customers. Using Rackspace to host the SaaS solution is just a delegation of the contractual duty of the SaaS supplier to provide services to the customer. If the hosting fails, the SaaS supplier is liable to its customers for the breach of contract. Not Rackspace.

Assignment clauses permit transfer of contractual obligations to perform the burden of the contract to third parties. So, where the obligation to perform is assigned to a third party and it's not performed, it will be the party that has taken over the burden of the contract (ie the assignee) that will be liable to the customer. Not the original contracting party (which would be the SaaS supplier in the example above).

The end result is that one of the original contracting parties is no longer a party to the contract: that’s novation. 

Example: Assignment Clause

A boilerplate provision to prevent assignment of the benefit and burden in a contract might be:

Neither party may without the prior written consent of the other party assign a benefit or obligation imposed in this Agreement.

The reference to “obligation” is usually redundant, because it can't be transferred without the consent of the other party in the first place.

Contract Assignments vs Subcontracting

Assignment clauses shouldn't be confused with subcontracting clauses .

The general law provides that a contracting party is entitled to subcontract works to a third person, unless there is a contractual restriction preventing it.

It would be quite a mistake to regard that as an "assignment" of the obligations under the contract.

It isn't a transfer of the contract, or any part of the burden of the contract.

It's a delegation .

Subcontracting performance of contractual obligations:

• is permitted where personal performance is not required to produce the result intended by the contract
• means performance by the subcontractor will discharge the principal contracting party's obligations.
• The principal contracting party remains liable if the subcontractor does not complete performance on behalf of the principal contracting party. 
• Boilerplate Clauses
• Who are you actually contracting with? Separate Legal Entities
• Increasing Liability for Breach of Contract: Indemnities 

Contract Law Solicitors

Contract law can be tricky. Sometimes it's matter of seeing what has happened before when parties have tried to transfer a contract to ascertain what is likely to happen in the case at hand.

Transferring contract rights and obligations can be a serious business. Getting it wrong can mean a party is in breach of contract,  leading to termination and damages claims. 

If you're in business and need legal advice on a contract, call +44 20 7036 9282 to speak for an initial chat with one of our contract law solicitors or email your enquiry to [email protected] .

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Statement
• Cookie Policy

Legal Advice

• Software Legal Advice
• Business Contracts
• Intellectual Property Advice

Contact Information

89 Fleet Street London EC4Y 1DH

[email protected]

+44 20 7036 9282

• Contact Support
• Returning Customer?
• Sign in to your account
• Contact support
• New Zealand
• South Africa

Novation and assignment

Changing the parties bound to a contract

What is novation, is novation a new contract, what is a deed of novation, why novation can be difficult, when do you use an assignment agreement to transfer a debt or obligation, transfer of a debt, transfer of service contracts.

Novation and assignment are ways for someone to transfer their interest in a contract to someone else.

Whilst the difference between assignment and novation is relatively small, it is an essential one. Assigning when you should novate could leave you in a position of being liable for your original contract when the other party is not liable to perform their obligations.

In contract law the principle of privity of contract means that only the parties to a contract have the obligation to fulfill it and the right to enforce it. Statute law has created a few exceptions but they apply rarely.

The legal concepts of novation and assignment have been developed to overcome the restrictions imposed by the doctrine.

Novation is a mechanism where one party transfers all its obligations and rights under a contract to a third party, with the consent of their original counter-party.

Novation in practice

Let us suppose Michael buys a car from Peter, owing him £5,000 as part of the sale price until Peter obtains a certifcate of authenticity.

Michael then sells the car to Fred under the same terms. Michael wants out, but has obligations to both parties.

Michael persuades Peter and Fred to enter into a novation agreement, signed by all three of them, whereby Fred takes over Michael’s obligations to Peter and Fred now deals with Peter in Michael’s place.

Other examples

The seller of a business transfers the contracts with their customers and suppliers to the buyer. A novation process transfers each contract by the mutual agreement of all three parties.

A design and build contractor in the construction industry transfers a construction contract to a new, substitute contractor. A novation agreement is necessary.

A novation agreement is a new contract that 'extinguishes' the old one.

Because it is a new contract, there can be new terms within it, giving additional rights and obligations.

There are times when and why you should use a deed explains exactly when you need to use one. Novation is not among them.

A Deed of Novation is a relic from long ago when lawyers were even more inclined to cloak their knowledge in obscurity.

One of the main purposes in using the deed format is that it provides the necessity for an unconnected witness to sign the document. So it is that much more difficult for one of the parties to say it was forged or signed a year later than the date shown.

But in a novation, there are at least three parties by definition; three parties who are most unlikely to be connected and each of whom has their separate interest. So you can be pretty sure the agreement has not been tampered with. A witness cannot improve on that. So you do not need a deed.

Another reason to use a deed could be when there is no 'consideration', that is when one of the original contracting parties receives no benefit - monetary or otherwise - in return fot the novation. However, in commercial circumstances you could nearly always argue that there is an advantage to each of the parties. The extinction of the old contract or subjectively more favourable terms within the new contract would both count as fair consideration.

Do you need a deed of novation for your situation? The answer is usually no, as an agreement is fine.

The exception to the rule is that if the original contract was signed as a deed, you need to use a deed to novate it. Real property transaction are by deed. That includes a consent to assign a lease, which has three parties. There are special reasons for that.

There are other examples too, which are more obscure.

When a contract is novated, the other (original) contracting party must be left in the same position as they were in prior to the novation being made.

Novation requires the agreement of all three parties. While obtaining the agreement of the transferor and transferee is easy, obtaining the agreement of the other original party can be more difficult:

The other original party may not understand the benefit to them of having the original contract novated and require extra information about the process that is time consuming to provide.

They may need extra assurance to be persuaded that they won’t be worse off as a result of the novation (especially common where there is a transfer of service contracts between suppliers).

It is possible that they could play up to delay the transfer and squeeze extra concessions from you.

The only way to transfer your rights or obligations is by an agreement signed by all three parties.

But what happens if you are a service provider selling your business with tens of thousands of customers? You can hardly ask every one of them to sign up to their own separate novation.

In practice, a well drawn original agreement will contain a provision which permits the service provider to assign (transfer its contract) without the permission of the customer.

But what happens if it does not?

In practice what happens is that the buyer 'takes a flyer'. The deal is done in the hope that the customers stay with the new owner.

Maybe the buyer obtains an indemnity from the seller to cover their loss if many leave. Maybe the buyer will write to the customers to encourage them to stay. Maybe the customers simply make the next payment and thereby confirm acceptance in law.

In each of those cases, the acquirer will be safe because the customers remain (or become) bound to the terms of the original contract.

Net Lawman offers an assignment agreement to cover that exact situation, together with a draft letter of the sort that might convince customers to stay with the new owner.

The other situation in which assignment is used is where the new party trusts the original party assigning the contract. For example, a subsidiary company may assign contractual obligations to a parent company confident that the parent will uphold the contract.

A construction company is a subsidary in a group. It is working in partnership with another business on several projects to build houses. The other business is a minor partner in the deal. The partnership has run out of money and the smaller partner is unable to inject any more funds. The parent business is unwilling to have its subsidiary fund the remainder of the projects by itself.

A solution may be for the parent to pay both its subsidiary and the third party for the construction contracts to be assigned to it (in other words, buy the contractual rights from the partnership). The assignment provisions would give the parent the obligation to finish the project, which it may be able to do without the third party.

Assignment transfers benefits only

Even if the assignee promises to take on the liability of the assignor to the third parties, the assignor remains personally liable if they fail to do so. An obligation to a third party cannot be assigned without their consent.

When assignment can invalidate your contract

Terms in an original contract can restrict or prohibit assignments. This is particularly common in construction contracts but can apply in any agreement. If you attempt to assign a contract that cannot be assigned, you risk invalidating the original contract.

Personal obligations and assignment

Be particularly careful of an assignment if your obligations can only be performed personally. A good example would be sale of a hair dressing business. Quite apart from the risk of the clients leaving, the actual forward appointments could be interpreted as contracts with the seller, even though they would have no way to fulfill them because they have sold the business.

Buying the right document

Very generally, if you are unsure whether you should assign or novate, we recommend that you novate and obtain consent of all parties. We offer a number of novation and assignment agreement templates for different situations.

For example: You borrow from a lender and you later want to transfer the debt to someone else (maybe a friend, a business partner or a the buyer of your business) so that they become liable to repay the lender instead of you. In this situation you should use an agreement that novates the debt .

This is a common consideration when a business is sold and outstanding debts of the business are transferred to the new owner (perhaps loans of money but maybe also loans of goods for sale).

Alternatively, you could novate in order to change who should pay back a personal loan between individuals.

Transfer of a right to receive the repayment of a debt

For example: You make a loan to someone (it could be money or goods) and later you want to change who receives the repayment (an agreement to change who the creditor is ).

The transaction might relate to the sale of a business where the buyer takes on the assets of the seller (the loans to other parties), or when factoring debt.

For example: You provide a service to someone and you want to transfer the obligation of providing that service to another person or company.

Again, a common use for a service contract novation agreement is where a business is sold and the buyer takes on the service contracts of the seller. The service could be in any industry, from a fixed period gardening contract to an on-going IT or website maintenance. Novation changes who is providing the service.

Transfer of an architectural or building contract

For example: You buy a building or property development that is still under construction and you want the existing contractor to continue work despite the original contract being between the contractor and the seller.

In this situation you should use a novation agreement for a building contract .

Our standard assignment agreement can be used for most assignments (exceptions given below). It is not specific to circumstances.

Assignment of a business lease

If you wish to transfer a commercial property lease to another business tenant during the fixed term, Net Lawman offers an agreement to assign a lease .

We have an article specifically about assigning a business lease that may be useful further reading.

It is not advisable to assign a residential tenancy agreement. We would suggest that you cancel the original agreement and draw up a new agreement with the new tenants.

Assignment of copyright

We have  number of assignment agreements for intellectual property rights .

They are effectively sale or transfer agreements where some rights are retained by the seller (such as to buyback the assigned work, or for the work only to be used in certain locations).

They relate to IP in media (such as a film or a music score) and to inventions.

Assignment of a life insurance policy or endowment policy

These agreements allows you to transfer the rights to receive payments from a life insurance policy or endowment policy. We offer both a deed of assignment of a policy on separation or divorce and a deed of assignment to gift or sell the policy to someone else .

Assignment and collateral warranties in the construction industry

Probably the most common use of assignment in the construction industry today is in relation to collateral warranties.

The collateral warranties given by consultants, contractors and sub-contractors in construction contracts are often assigned to subsequent owners or leases. Assignment can do no more than transfer rights available to the assignor. It is not capable of creating new rights and obligations in favour of an assignee.

So while the client can, in theory, assign the right to have a building adequately designed, it is unclear what right would be transferred to sue for damages in the event of breach. If the developer (who would usually be the assignor) has sold the building or created a full-repairing lease, then their right would be to nominal damages only. This is one situation where you should definitely use a deed of novation.

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Our Cookie Notice is part of our Privacy Policy and explains in detail how and why we use cookies. To take full advantage of our website, we recommend that you click on “Accept All”. You can change these settings at any time via the button “Update Cookie Preferences” in our Cookie Notice .

Technical cookies are required for the site to function properly, to be legally compliant and secure. Session cookies only last for the duration of your visit and are deleted from your device when you close your internet browser. Persistent cookies, however, remain and continue functioning on repeat visits.

CMS does not use any cookie based Analytics or tracking on our websites; see details here .

Personalisation cookies collect information about your website browsing habits and offer you a personalised user experience based on past visits, your location or browser settings. They also allow you to log in to personalised areas and to access third party tools that may be embedded in our website. Some functionality will not work if you don’t accept these cookies.

Social Media cookies collect information about you sharing information from our website via social media tools, or analytics to understand your browsing between social media tools or our Social Media campaigns and our own websites. We do this to optimise the mix of channels to provide you with our content. Details concerning the tools in use are in our privacy policy .

How to bookmark a page on iPhone 

• Tap the Share button at the bottom of the Safari screen for the website you're on
• Tap the icon labelled 'Add to Home Screen'
• Tap the 'Add' button in the upper right corner
• Launch the website from your Home screen by tapping its icon.

How to bookmark a page on Android 

• Click on the 'menu' button.
• Click on the 'start' button and save as a bookmark.
• Click on the 'menu' button again and select "Bookmarks".
• Press and hold the LawNow icon and then click "Add to home screen".

How to bookmark a page on Windows 

• Click on the "..." icon in the bottom-right of the screen.
• Select "pin to start"
• A new tile linking to LawNow will now appear on the start menu

How to bookmark a page on Blackberry 

• Click on the BlackBerry 'menu' icon.
• Select "Add to Home Screen".
• In the "Add to Home Screen" dialog window, select the "add" button.

Search Filters

• Member log in

Jurisdiction / Region

Our combination of practice excellence and deep industry expertise provides a distinct competitive advantage to our clients, bringing together legal expertise, commercial insight and close professional support.

• Bosnia and Herzegovina
• Czech Republic
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Netherlands
• North Macedonia
• Saudi Arabia
• South Africa
• Switzerland
• United Arab Emirates
• United Kingdom
• Consumer Products (all)
• Consumer Products - fashion & luxury
• Consumer Products - FMCG
• Consumer Products - food & drink
• Consumer Products - retail
• Data Centres
• Energy (all)
• Energy - Conventional Power
• Energy - Nuclear
• Energy - Oil & Gas
• Energy - Power
• Energy - Renewables & Climate
• Energy - Water
• Higher Education
• Hotels & Leisure
• Infrastructure & Projects
• Life Sciences
• Manufacturing
• Private Equity
• Public Sector
• Real Estate & Construction
• Technology, Media and Communications

Our Expertise

• ADR/mediation
• Advertising & Marketing
• Agriculture
• Anti-bribery & Corruption
• Asset Finance
• Asset Management, Funds and Capital Investment Law
• Banking & Finance
• Class actions
• Commercial & General Business Issues
• Commercial Contracts
• Commercial Distribution
• Communications
• Competition/antitrust
• Construction
• Corporate Finance
• Corporate Law & Transactions
• Corporate Recovery & Insolvency
• Criminal Law
• Crypto, FinTech & Digital Assets
• Data Protection & Privacy
• Debt Capital Markets
• Derivatives & Structured Finance
• Directors' Issues
• Distribution and Franchising
• Employee Share Schemes
• Energy Disputes
• Environment
• Environment - Cleantech
• Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG)
• Equity Capital Markets
• EU Sales Law
• Financial Institutions Regulation
• Health and Safety
• Hotels - Financing
• Infrastructure
• Insolvency law & restructuring
• Insurance & Reinsurance
• Intellectual Property
• International Arbitration
• Investigations & Dawn Raids
• Investing in Europe
• Investment Arbitration
• Islamic finance
• IT Security Law
• Life Sciences - Healthcare
• Life Sciences - Regulation
• MBOs/MBIs & Private Equity
• Merger Control
• Mergers & Acquisitions
• Mining and Minerals
• Outsourcing
• Personal Injury
• Private Clients
• Procurement
• Product Liability
• Professional Indemnity/ Negligence
• Projects & Project Finance
• Real Estate
• Real Estate - Finance
• Sustainability
• Tax - Transfer Pricing
• US Securities

Contracts: The critical difference between Assignment and Novation

Introduction

An assignment of rights under a contract is normally restricted to the benefit of the contract. Where a party wishes to transfer both the benefit and burden of the contract this generally needs to be done by way of a novation. The distinction between assignment and novation was addressed recently in the case of Davies v Jones (2009), whereby the court considered whether a deed of assignment of the rights under a contract could also transfer a positive contractual obligation, which in this instance included the obligation to pay.

Mr Jones (the first defendant) contracted to sell Lidl (the second defendant) a freehold property (the “Lidl Contract”). At that time, the freehold was vested in the claimants as trustees of a retired benefit scheme. Mr Jones contracted to buy the land from the claimants (the “ Trustee Contract”) and assigned his right, title and interest to the Trustee Contract to Lidl by way of a deed of assignment.

Clause 18 of the Trustee Contract permitted Mr Jones, as purchaser, to retain £100,000 from the purchase monies payable to the claimants until the outstanding works (ground clearance and site preparation) had been completed. Following completion of the works Mr Jones was entitled to retain one half of the proper costs from the retention and release the balance to the claimants. There was a similar clause in the Lidl Contract, which allowed Lidl to retain the proper costs from the retention. Importantly, although similar, under the Lidl Contract Lidl was entitled to retain the whole cost of carrying out the works as against only half in the Trustee Contract.

Lidl retained the sum of £100,000 from the money due by Mr Jones to the claimants on completion of the contract. Once the works were completed Mr Jones failed to pay the claimant the retention monies claiming that the proper cost of the works was over £200,000.

The claimants argued that the benefits granted by way of the assignment were conditional on Lidl performing Mr Jones’ obligations under the Trustee Contract. Therefore, the question considered by the court was whether Lidl was bound to observe the terms of the Trustee Contract and in particular clause 18, given that benefit of the contract had been assigned to them.

The court held that the benefit which passed to Lidl by way of the deed of assignment did not require Lidl to perform the obligations of Mr Jones under the Trustee Contract. The assignment did not impose any burden on Lidl. The only person who clause 18 of the Trustee Contract was binding on was Mr Jones. The transfer to Lidl could not impose on Lidl the obligation to perform Mr Jones’ obligations and these therefore remained with Mr Jones. This reaffirms the principle that when you take an assignment of a contract, you don’t take on the burden (except in limited circumstances where enjoyment of the benefit is conditional on complying with some formality). Therefore, if an owner assigns a building contract to a purchaser of land and the building is still under construction, the obligation to pay the contractor remains with the original owner and does not pass to the new owner.

Assignment and novation in the Construction Industry

Both assignment and novation are common within the construction industry and careful consideration is required as to which mechanism is suitable. Assignments are frequently used in relation to collateral warranties, whereby the benefit of a contract is transferred to a third party. Likewise, an assignment of rights to a third party with an interest in a project may be suitable when the Employer still needs to fulfil certain obligations under the contract, for example, where works are still in progress. A novation is appropriate where the original contracting party wants the obligations under the contract to rest with a third party. This is commonly seen in a design and build scenario whereby the Employer novates the consultants’ contracts to the Contractor, so that the benefit and burden of the appointments are transferred, and the Employer benefits from a single point of responsibility in the form of the Contractor.

If the intention is that the assignee is to accept both the benefit and burden of a contract, it is not normally sufficient to rely on a deed of assignment, as the burden of the contract remains with the assignor. In these instances a novation would be a preferable method of transferring obligations, and this allows for both the benefit and burden to be transferred to the new party and leaves no residual liability with the transferor.

Reference: Davies v Jones [2009] EWCA Civ 1164.

Related content

Countdown to ukca compliance: changes in construction product marking, court of appeal guidance on allocations under the building safety fund, italian supreme court upholds oecd transfer pricing rules.

• Follow us on:
• LinkedIn  

© CMS Legal 2024

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Notice

Assignment and other dealings

• Using your device

What does it do and why do I need it?

An assignment clause aims to control who performs a contract and who can receive benefits under the contract. It does not, however, mean that a party’s contractual obligations are transferred over, it simply means that the performance of such obligations can be delegated. This means that burdens cannot be assigned as a matter of law, but benefits can. 

Including such a clause is important if you wish to control who receives the benefit of your performance if you are the supplier, or if you are a customer, control who carries out the contract for you. This may be important to you, for instance, if you do not wish to deliver work to your competitors or you do not want a particular person in your supply chain.

If the contract is silent on assignment and other dealings, a party can normally assign, mortgage, charge or declare a trust over its rights under the contract, without the other party’s consent and use a subcontractor to perform (but not transfer) its contractual duties. In some cases, however, a restriction on subcontracting may be implied where personal performance is required for example.

In light of this, if the parties wish to restrict such abilities, they should do this expressly. Please note, however, a prohibition on assignment has no effect on assignment of a right to receive payment, this applies to many contracts for supply of goods, services or intangibles made between UK businesses on or after 31 December 2018. 

What should I look out for?

• Effect of an assignment breach - in most cases, a breach of an assignment restriction in the main contract may trigger termination rights or other remedies, may be valid between the assignor and assignee and it does not bind the original promisor who remains liable to the original promisee (the party receiving the benefit).
• Effect of a restriction of other dealings breach - if the wording specifically carves out restrictions on ‘mortgages, charges or trust of rights’ then it should be effective to stop the contracting party holding its rights in trust for a non-party. However, a restriction on an assignment/transfer alone might not have this effect. On the contrary, in relation to a subcontract, if a restriction was in place and there has been a breach, the subcontract is normally still valid, but the other party to the main contract may not be obliged to accept or pay for the subcontractor’s performance.
• Novation - if a party wants to actually transfer its obligations under the contract, as opposed to delegating their performance, it will need to do so by way of novation.
• Subcontracting of processing personal data - if, as part of subcontracting its obligations generally, the assigning/subcontracting party is subcontracting obligations to process personal data, it should note that the GDPR imposes conditions on sub-processing. The main contractor should check the data processing provisions and subcontracting provisions in the contract for provisions relating to sub-processing.
• Indemnities - in relation to subcontracting duties, the main contractor remains liable to the continuing party for the performance of any part of the contract that is still to be fulfilled. Therefore, a main contractor will therefore generally ask their subcontractor for an indemnity against any breach or failure to perform the contract. The indemnity will not usually cover liabilities incurred before the subcontracting took effect.

If you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact Ben Taylor .

• Commercial law

Related insights

Unlocking the legal vault: navigating non-party access to court documents- a discussion on the proposed changes to cpr 5.4.

27 June 2024

Recently, there has been considerable discussion within the legal community regarding the Consultation on Amending the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), particularly focusing on proposed changes to CPR...

Hague Convention - Enforcing English judgments outside the jurisdiction

Any steps to streamline dealings with EU nation states post Brexit is likely welcomed by UK businesses. Those needing to enforce a judgment against an entity based in an EU country may be...

Breach of Warranty Claim – Notice – Reasonable detail - Court of Appeal decision

A recent Court of Appeal decision has overturned a High Court judgment on the reasonableness of the detail required to give notice of a breach of warranty claim - Drax Smart Generation Holdco Ltd...

Interest on Costs – Court of Appeal clarifies

25 April 2024

In a recent Court of Appeal decision - Deutsche Bank AG v Sebastian Holdings Inc and another [2024] EWCA Civ 245, the Court of Appeal unanimously allowed an appeal regarding section 24(2) of the...

Eyes wide open: non-party costs orders – disclosure in support

24 April 2024

A recent decision in the Technology & Construction Court (TCC) in Topalsson GMBH v Rolls-Royce Motor Cars Ltd [2024] EWHC 297 (TCC) highlights the risks to directors’ funding and controlling...

Contentious Business Update April 2024

29 April 2024

Welcome to our Contentious Business Update where we focus on some topical and interesting legal issues affecting businesses. We hope you find this edition informative and insightful...

We provide advice on a wide range of commercial agreements from trading agreements, outsourcing and other trading contracts and specialist projects. We have specialist experience in healthcare, financial services, media, entertainment and sport, private equity and logistics. Our clients include a number of large listed and private companies, start-ups, financial institutions and public sector bodies.

You can trust the market knowledge of lawyers who understand your sector, and the pragmatic advice from people who take the time to get to know your business. Expect excellent client service, with close access to partners and experts.

• Success Stories
• Capabilities
• Trending Topics
• TwoBirds TV
• News & Deals
• Español
• Français
• 한국어
• 中文
• 日本語

HMA Bites: Assignment and transfer clauses

Oct 28 2021

Senior Associate UK

Welcome to HMA Bites! In each edition of Check-In we will take a concise look at an issue relating to hotel management agreements ("HMAs") and provide insight, tips and advice based on our experience in practice. In this edition, we will be taking a look at assignment and transfer clauses in HMAs.

As with any commercial contract, assignment clauses are a standard (and important) part of an HMA, and future-proof the underlying commercial arrangement by anticipating (and legislating for) exits, sales, restructurings and other events which a party may undergo.

A typical assignment clause in an operator-friendly HMA might read as follows:

"The Operator may assign its rights and/or obligations under this Agreement to an Affiliate who has the ability to perform Operator's obligations hereunder, without prior written notice to the Owner."

Often the word "assign" may be replaced or accompanied by words such as "transfer" or "novate" – or may even contain all three.

It is easy to think that these words are more or less synonymous, and can therefore be used interchangeably or in combination to the same end. It is also easy to think that these words can apply equally to a party's rights and to its obligations. In some jurisdictions, this is true. But if your HMA is governed by English law, you must choose these words carefully – and your assignment clause must be drafted carefully so as to cater for the appropriate formalities.

Under English law, an "assignment" refers to the transfer of a contractual right from one party to another. This enables the transferee to enjoy the benefit of the right which has been transferred, and to enforce that right against the contracting party which owes the corresponding obligation in accordance with the terms of the contract.

English law permits the benefit of a contract to be assigned freely. This means that a party to an HMA can (unless the HMA states otherwise) assign its right under the HMA without the requirement for consent or notice. An example of a contractual right which a party might wish to assign to another party is the right to receive payment under a contract. A party might wish to direct payment to be made to another group entity for internal accounting purposes, or it might wish to assign receivables to a lender as part of a financing arrangement.

But whilst contractual rights can be assigned, English law does not permit the burden of a contract (i.e. a contractual obligation) to be "assigned" . Instead, the transfer of a contractual obligation requires a "novation" – whereby the party benefitting from the relevant obligation must be aware of and must consent to the proposed transfer.

A novation therefore requires a tri-partite agreement to be entered into between the incoming party (i.e. the transferee of the obligations), the outgoing party (i.e. the transferor of the obligations), and the remaining contracting party (i.e. the beneficiary of the obligations being transferred).

Under the terms of the novation agreement:

• the outgoing party will cease to be a party to the contract
• the incoming party will replace the outgoing party as a party to the contract
• the remaining party will agree to release the outgoing party from future obligations under the contract
• the incoming party will agree to perform the future obligations under the contract.

In light of the above, parties to an English-law governed HMA should review the transfer clauses carefully to ensure that "assignment" and "novation" are dealt with separately and correctly.

A common approach is as follows:

• a party may assign any or all of its rights under the HMA (but not its obligations) – either with or without consent, and either with or without notice
• a party may novate all of its rights and obligations under the HMA – in which case the parties will (and the outgoing party will ensure that the incoming party will) enter into an agreed form of novation agreement.

Latest insights

The End of the Commercial Agency Protections? UK Government Extends Consultation into Repealing Retained EU Commercial Agency Regulations

Jul 03 2024

The Digital Services Act in Ireland: Levies

Jul 02 2024

Horizon Scanning 2024/2025

Related capabilities.

Assignment and Novation: Spot the Difference 12 November 2020

The english technology and construction court has found that the assignment of a sub-contract from a main contractor to an employer upon termination of an epc contract will, in the absence of express intention to the contrary, transfer both accrued and future contractual benefits..

In doing so, Mrs Justice O’Farrell has emphasised established principles on assignment and novation, and the clear conceptual distinction between them. While this decision affirms existing authority, it also highlights the inherent risks for construction contractors in step-in assignment arrangements.

"This decision shows the court’s desire to give effect to clear contractual provisions, particularly in complex construction contracts, even where doing so puts a party in a difficult position."

This preliminary issues judgment in the matter of Energy Works (Hull) Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd & Others¹ , is the latest in a long series of decisions surrounding the Energy Works plant, a fluidised bed gasification energy-from-waste power plant in Hull². The defendant, MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd (“MW”), was engaged as the main contractor by the claimant and employer, Energy Works (Hull) Ltd (“EWHL”), under an EPC contract entered into in November 2015. Through a sub-contract, MW engaged Outotec (USA) Inc (“Outotec”) to supply key elements for the construction of the plant.

By March 2019, issues had arisen with the project. EWHL terminated the main contract for contractor default and, pursuant to a term in the EPC contract, asked MW to assign to it MW’s sub-contract with Outotec. The sub-contract permitted assignment, but MW and EWHL were unable to agree a deed of assignment. Ultimately, MW wrote to EWHL and Outotec, notifying them both that it was assigning the sub-contract to EWHL. EWHL subsequently brought £133m proceedings against MW, seeking compensation for the cost of defects and delay in completion of the works. The defendant disputed the grounds of the termination, denied EWHL’s claims, and sought to pass on any liability to Outotec through an additional claim under the sub-contract. Outotec disputed MW’s entitlement to bring the additional claim on the grounds that MW no longer had any rights under the sub-contract, because those rights had been assigned to EWHL.

The parties accepted that a valid transfer in respect of the sub-contract had taken place. However, MW maintained that the assignment only transferred future rights under the sub-contract and that all accrued rights – which would include the right to sue Outotec for any failure to perform in accordance with the sub-contract occurring prior to the assignment – remained with MW. In the alternative, MW argued that the transfer had been intended as a novation such that all rights and liabilities had been transferred. As a secondary point, MW also claimed eligibility for a contribution from Outotec under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 for their alleged partial liability³.

An assignment is a transfer of a right from one party to another. Usually this is the transfer by one party of its rights and remedies, under a contract with a counterparty, to a third party. However, importantly, the assignor remains liable for any obligations it owes under the contract. As an example, Party A can assign to Party C its right to receive goods under a contract with Party B, but it will remain liable to pay Party B for those goods. Section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1926 requires a valid statutory assignment to be absolute, in writing, and on notice to the contractual counterparty.

Key contacts

Rebecca Williams

Partner London

Mark McAllister-Jones

Counsel London

"In the absence of any clear contrary intention, reference to assignment of the contract by parties is understood to mean assignment of the benefit, that is, accrued and future rights."

In this case, the precise scope of the transferred rights and the purported assignment of contractual obligations were in issue. Mrs Justice O’Farrell looked to the House of Lords’ decision in Linden Gardens⁴ to set out three relevant principles on assignment:

• Subject to any express contractual restrictions, a party to a contract can assign the benefit of a contract, but not the burden, without the consent of the other party to the contract;
• In the absence of any clear contrary intention, reference to assignment of the contract by parties is understood to mean assignment of the benefit, that is, accrued and future rights; and
• It is possible to assign only future rights under a contract (i.e. so that the assignor retains any rights which have already accrued at the date of the assignment), but clear words are needed to give effect to such an intention.

Hence, in relation to MW’s first argument, it is theoretically possible to separate future and accrued rights for assignment, but this can only be achieved through “careful and intricate drafting, spelling out the parties’ intentions”. The judge held that, since such wording was absent here, MW had transferred all its rights, both accrued and future, to EWHL, including its right to sue Outotec.

Whereas assignment only transfers a party’s rights under a contract, novation transfers both a party’s rights and its obligations . Strictly speaking, the original contract is extinguished and a new one formed between the incoming party and the remaining party to the original contract. This new contract has the same terms as the original, unless expressly agreed otherwise by the parties.

Another key difference from assignment is that novation requires the consent of all parties involved, i.e. the transferring party, the counterparty, and the incoming party. With assignment, the transferring party is only required to notify its counterparty of the assignment. Consent to a novation can be given when the original contract is first entered into. However, when giving consent to a future novation, the parties must be clear what the terms of the new contract will be.

"Mrs Justice O’Farrell stressed that “it is a matter for the parties to determine the basis on which they allocate risk within the contractual matrix.”"

A novation need not be in writing. However, the desire to show that all parties have given the required consent, the use of deeds of novation to avoid questions of consideration, and the use of novation to transfer ‘key’ contracts, particularly in asset purchase transactions, means that they often do take written form. A properly drafted novation agreement will usually make clear whether the outgoing party remains responsible for liabilities accrued prior to the transfer, or whether these become the incoming party’s problem.

As with any contractual agreement, the words used by the parties are key. Mrs Justice O’Farrell found that the use of the words “assign the sub-contract” were a strong indication that in this case the transfer was intended to be an assignment, and not a novation.

This decision reaffirms the established principles of assignment and novation and the distinction between them. It also shows the court’s desire to give effect to clear contractual provisions, particularly in complex construction contracts, even where doing so puts a party in a difficult position. Here, it was found that MW had transferred away its right to pursue Outotec for damages under the sub-contract, but MW remained liable to EWHL under the EPC contract. As a result, EWHL had the right to pursue either or both of MW and Outotec for losses arising from defects in the Outotec equipment, but where it chose to pursue only MW, MW had no contractual means of recovering from Outotec any sums it had to pay to EWHL. Mrs Justice O’Farrell stressed that “it is a matter for the parties to determine the basis on which they allocate risk within the contractual matrix.” A contractor in MW’s position can still seek from a sub-contractor a contribution in respect of its liability to the employer under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 (as the judge confirmed MW was entitled to do in this case). However, the wording of the Act is very specific, and it may not always be possible to pass down a contractual chain all, or any, of a party’s liability.

Commercially, contractors often assume some risk of liability to the employer without the prospect of recovery from a sub-contractor, such as where the sub-contractor becomes insolvent, or where the sub-contract for some reason cannot be negotiated and agreed on back-to-back terms with the EPC contract. However, contractors need to consider carefully the ramifications of provisions allowing the transfer of sub-contracts to parties further up a contractual chain and take steps to ensure such provisions reflect any agreement as to the allocation of risk on a project.

This article was authored by London Dispute Resolution Co-Head and Partner Rebecca Williams , Senior Associate Mark McAllister-Jones and Gerard Rhodes , a trainee solicitor in the London office.

[1] [2020] EWHC 2537 (TCC)

[2] See, for example, the decisions in Premier Engineering (Lincoln) Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 2484, reported in our article here , Engie Fabricom (UK) Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 1626 (TCC) and C Spencer Limited v MW High Tech Projects UK Limited [2020] EWCA Civ 331, reported in our article here .

[3] The Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 allows that “ any person liable in respect of any damage suffered by another person may recover contribution from any other person liable in respect of the same damage whether jointly with him or otherwise .”

[4] Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd [1994] 1 AC 85

DOWNLOAD PDF

• EPC Contract
• Power Plant
• Transfer of rights

Related insights

Commercial disputes weekly – issue 211, the itlos advisory opinion on climate change: key findings and considerations for deep seabed mining, commercial disputes weekly – issue 210, follow us on.

• X (Twitter)

What is the Difference Between an Assignment and a Novation in the UK?

By Edward Carruthers

Updated on 21 November 2022 Reading time: 5 minutes

This article meets our strict editorial principles. Our lawyers, experienced writers and legally trained editorial team put every effort into ensuring the information published on our website is accurate. We encourage you to seek independent legal advice. Learn more .

• What is an Assignment? 

What is a Novation?

Two key differences between an assignment and a novation, key takeaways, frequently asked questions.

As a business owner, you may encounter occasions where you must transfer certain beneficial rights or obligations to a third party. For example, your business may stop performing a service and wish to transfer the rights conveyed to you under a particular contract to another party. An assignment or a novation can help you do this. However, they act in very different ways and have differing requirements. This article will explain the main differences between an assignment and a novation and the circumstances where you may wish to use them. 

What is an Assignment? 

Under the terms of a standard contractual agreement, you or your business partners will receive rights or benefits. You can transfer the right to receive these benefits through an assignment to anyone who is not part of the original agreement. Assignments are made through an assignment deed, which will set out the benefits you wish to bestow on another person. It is worth noting that you can only assign your own rights. You cannot assign any other person’s rights conveyed in a contract.

Once you (the assignor) transfer your rights to the third party (the assignee), they can enjoy the benefits of the contract you provided.

Assignments are common in construction contracts where a property developer may enter into a building contract with a contractor. The developer can transfer their rights under that contract to anyone buying the property. Those rights then allow the purchaser to demand the contractor perform their duties under the original arrangement. Otherwise, they can make a claim against the contractor for a breach of contract. 

Novations are slightly more complicated than assignments. They transfer both the rights and obligations that you have under a contract. You may use a novation to leave a contract you no longer wish to be a party to and find a replacement. For example, if you stop trading in a specific service or line of goods, you can use a novation deed to remove yourself from a contract to provide these services. The novation deed will then allow you to substitute yourself for someone else willing to do this work.

Technically, a novation cancels the original contract you held with your business partner and creates a duplicate contract. In that duplicate, a third party will take the rights, benefits, and obligations conveyed to you from that agreement.

As the party leaving the contract, you will let go of all your rights to your benefits under the original contract. You will also no longer need to perform your contractual duties. It is worth noting that the burden of finding a replacement party for the novation often falls on the person leaving the contract. Therefore, to set up a novation, you must find the replacement yourself. However, you should be aware that any party involved in the existing contract can veto your decision to bring in a replacement if they are unsatisfied.

Novations often happen where businesses are bought and sold or where debt transactions occur. For example, when a company borrows money from a lender and wants to transfer the obligations to repay the debt to a third party. They can transfer these obligations via a novation. 

As discussed above, the main difference between an assignment and a novation is that a novation transfers your obligations and rights under that contract. By contrast, an assignment transfers only your rights and benefits.

But there are other differences between the two that business owners must be aware of.

1. Novations Require the Consent of All Parties

An assignment does not require the consent of all parties to the contract to transfer the rights. Additionally, you do not necessarily have to notify the other parties to an agreement that an assignment is taking place. However, as a commercial courtesy, it is wise to notify your business partners that you intend to assign your rights to a third party. It is also essential to ensure no contractual terms prohibit you from transferring a benefit to a third party. Doing say may lead to breaching the contract, and you will be liable for damages. 

With novations, you must obtain consent from every party to a contract before transferring your contractual obligations and rights. This is because you are transferring your duties to perform obligations to a third party. In addition, as the other businesses involved in a contract rely on the performance of these obligations, they have a right to be notified of the novation arrangements. They must also provide their consent to these arrangements. Therefore, a novation deed must be signed and approved by every party to that original agreement, including the party exiting the contract.

2. Novations Require Consideration

Consideration is an essential element of contract law. It is a legal term for payment of value in exchange for a promise. To have a legally binding contract, you must have some form of consideration passing between parties. For example, in a delivery contract, one party must pay another party for shipping a set of goods. Without that consideration passing between parties, you cannot have a legally binding contract, and you can take action against your business partner for breach of contract. 

Novation deeds require you to exchange consideration before terminating the original contract. They also require consideration when making the new novation contract. On the other hand, as assignments do not involve the termination of a contract, you do not have to show that parties to the contract exchanged consideration.

Assignments and novations differ in three important ways. For instance, assignments transfer rights to contractual benefits to third parties, while novations transfer rights and obligations under a contract to a third party. Additionally, novations require the consent of all parties to the contract. On the other hand, you can make assignments without the consent of all parties. Finally, novations require consideration. 

If you need help transferring your rights, our experienced contract lawyers can assist as part of our LegalVision membership. For a low monthly fee, you will have unlimited access to lawyers to answer your questions and draft and review your documents.  Call us today on 0808 196 8584 or visit our membership page .

Assignments are where business owners can transfer a right or benefit given to them under a contractual arrangement to a third party. 

A novation transfers both a business owner’s rights and obligations under a contract to a third party. 

We appreciate your feedback – your submission has been successfully received.

Register for our free webinars

Corporate governance 101: responsibilities for directors, business divorces: exiting directors and shareholders from your company, contact us now.

Fill out the form and we will contact you within one business day

Related articles

How Do I Assign a Commercial Lease in the UK?

Sale of Goods Act in England?">Can I Contract Out of the Sale of Goods Act in England?

4 Steps to Take Before Signing a Contract in England

Benefits of Working With a Lawyer to Review Your Company Contract in England and Wales

We’re an award-winning law firm

2023 Economic Innovator of the Year Finalist - The Spectator

2023 Law Company of the Year Finalist - The Lawyer Awards

2023 Future of Legal Services Innovation - Legal Innovation Awards

2021 Fastest Growing Law Firm in APAC - Financial Times

Choose Your Legal Category:

• Online Law Library
•   Bankruptcy Law
•   Business Law
•   Civil Law
•   Criminal Law
•   Employment Law
•   Family Law
•   Finance Law
•   Government Law
•   Immigration Law
•   Insurance Law
•   Intellectual Property Law
•   Personal Injury Law
•   Products & Services Law
•   Real Estate Law
•   Wills, Trusts & Estates Law
•   Attorney Referral Services
•   Top 10 Most Popular Articles
•   Legal Dictionary
• How It Works - Clients
• Legal Center
• About LegalMatch
• Consumer Satisfaction
• Editorial Policy
• Attorneys Market Your Law Practice Attorney Login Schedule a Demo Now Did LegalMatch Call You Recently? How It Works - Attorneys Attorney Resources Attorney Success Stories Attorney Success Story Videos Compare Legal Marketing Services Cases Heatmap View Cases
• Find a Lawyer
• Legal Topics
• Contract Law

Contract Assignments

(This may not be the same place you live)

  What is a Contract Assignment?

In a contract assignment, one of the two parties to a contract may transfer their right to the other’s performance to a third party. This is known as “contract assignment.” Generally, all rights under a contract may be assigned. A provision in the contract that states the contract may not be assigned usually refers to the delegation of the assignor’s (person who assigns) duties under that contract, not their rights under the contract. 

In modern law, the phrase “assignment of contract” usually means assignment of both rights and duties under a contract.

Who are the Various Parties Involved in a Contract Assignment?

How is a contract assignment created, when is a contract assignment prohibited, which parties are liable to each other in a contract assignment, are there issues with multiple assignments, should i hire a lawyer for contract assignments.

In a contract, there are two parties to the agreement, X and Y. The parties may agree to let X assign X’s rights to a third party . Once the third party enters the picture, each party has a special name. For instance, suppose X, a seller of bookmarks, contracts with Y, a purchaser of bookmarks. Y desires to have Y’s right to X’s performance (the sale of bookmarks on a monthly basis) to another person. 

This third person, Z, is called the assignee. X is called the obligor , and Y is called the assignor , since Y has assigned its right to X’s performance . X, the obligor, is obligated to continue to perform its duties under the agreement.

There are no “magic words” needed to create an assignment. The law simply requires that the would-be assignor have an intent to immediately and completely transfer their rights in the agreement. In addition, writing is typically not required to create an assignment. As long as X and Y both adequately understand what right is being assigned, an assignment is created. 

Words that indicate a transfer is to take place suffice, such as “I intend to transfer my rights under this agreement,” or, “I intend to give my rights to Z,” or “I intend to confer an assignment on Z.” In addition,consideration,which is a bargained-for exchange required for a contract to be valid, is not required for assignment.

In certain instances, an assignment of contract rights can be prohibited. If the contract contains a clause prohibiting assignment of “the contract,” without specifying more, the law construes this language as barring only delegation of the assignor’s duties, not their rights. If the assignment language states “assignment of contractual rights are prohibited,” the obligor may sue for damages if the assignor attempts to assign the agreement. If the contract language states that attempts to assign “will be void,” the parties can bar assignment.of rights.

Under modern contract law, the phrase “I assign the contract” is usually interpreted to mean that one is assigning rights and duties. What is an assignment of duties? An assignment of duties occurs where Y, called the obligor or delegator, promises to perform for X, the obligee. Y then delegates their duty to perform to Z, the delegate. Under the law, most duties can be delegated. 

There are exceptions to this rule. Delegation can be prohibited when:

• The duties to be performed involve personal judgment and special skill (e.g., a portrait, creation of a custom-made dress). 
• “Personal judgment” is the exercise of some kind of superior judgment when it comes to determining how, when, or where to do something. Examples of individuals who exercise personal judgment include talent scouts and financial advisors.  Special skill is the unique ability to create a good or perform a service. A delegator can be prohibited from delegating duties when it is that specific delegator’s services are sought. For example, if the services of a specific famous chef are sought, and the original agreement was entered into on the understanding that the chef was hired for their specific talent, the delegator may not delegate the services;
• The assignment fundamentally changes risks or responsibilities under the agreement;
• The assignment is over future rights associated with a future contract that does not currently exist;
• Delegation would increase the obligation of the obligee. For example, if a shoe manufacturer contracts to deliver soles to a store in the same town as the shoe factory, the other party cannot assign the delivery to a different store in another state. Doing so would impose a greater obligation on the obligee than was originally contemplated;
• The obligee had placed special trust in the delegator. For example, assume that you have hired a patent attorney, based on that attorney’s significant skill and expertise, to obtain a valuable patent. You have placed special trust in this person, hiring them instead of other patent attorneys, because of their unique expertise. In such a situation, the attorney may not delegate his duties to another attorney (delegate), since the attorney was hired because of one person’s special capabilities;
• The delegation is of a promise to repay a debt; or
• The contract itself restricts or prohibits delegation. If the contract states, “any attempt to delegate duties under this contract is void,” a delegation will not be permitted.

In a contract involving assignment of rights, the assignee may sue the obligor. This is because the assignee, once the assignee has been assigned rights, is entitled to performance under the contract. If the obligor had a defense that existed in the original contract between obligor and assignor, the obligor may assert that defense against the assignee. Examples of such defenses include the original contract was not valid because of lack of consideration, or because there was never a valid offer or acceptance).

An assignee may also sue an assignor. Generally, if an assignment is made for consideration,it is irrevocable. Assignments not made for consideration, but under which an obligor has already performed, are also irrevocable. If an assignor attempts to revoke an irrevocable assignment,the assignee may sue for “wrongful revocation.” 

In circumstances involving delegation of duties,an obligee must accept performance from the delegate of all duties that may be delegated. The delegator remains liable on the agreement. Therefore, the obligee may sue the delegator for nonperformance by the delegate. The obligee may sue the delegate for nonperformance, but can only require the delegate to perform if there has been an assumption by the delegate. An assumption by the delegate is a promise that the delegate will perform the delegated duty, which promise is supported by consideration. 

Assignments that are not supported by consideration are revocable. If an initial assignment is revocable, a subsequent assignment can revoke it. If a first assignment is irrevocable, because consideration was present,the first assignment will usually prevail over a subsequent assignment. This means the person who can claim the assignment was first made to them will prevail over someone who claims a subsequent assignment. 

If, however, the second person paid value for the assignment, and entered into the assignment without knowing of the first assignment, the “subsequent”assignee is entitled to proceeds the first judgment against the obligor (the original party who still must perform), in the event such a judgment is issued,

If you have an issue with assignment of rights or duties under a contract, you should contact a contract lawyer  for advice. An experienced business lawyer near you can review the facts of your case, advise you of your rights, and represent you in court proceedings.

Save Time and Money - Speak With a Lawyer Right Away

• Buy one 30-minute consultation call or subscribe for unlimited calls
• Subscription includes access to unlimited consultation calls at a reduced price
• Receive quick expert feedback or review your DIY legal documents
• Have peace of mind without a long wait or industry standard retainer
• Get the right guidance - Schedule a call with a lawyer today!

Need a Contract Lawyer in your Area?

• Connecticut
• Massachusetts
• Mississippi
• New Hampshire
• North Carolina
• North Dakota
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• South Dakota
• West Virginia

Daniel Lebovic

LegalMatch Legal Writer

Original Author

Prior to joining LegalMatch, Daniel worked as a legal editor for a large HR Compliance firm, focusing on employer compliance in numerous areas of the law including workplace safety law, health care law, wage and hour law, and cybersecurity. Prior to that, Daniel served as a litigator for several small law firms, handling a diverse caseload that included cases in Real Estate Law (property ownership rights, residential landlord/tenant disputes, foreclosures), Employment Law (minimum wage and overtime claims, discrimination, workers’ compensation, labor-management relations), Construction Law, and Commercial Law (consumer protection law and contracts). Daniel holds a J.D. from the Emory University School of Law and a B.S. in Biological Sciences from Cornell University. He is admitted to practice law in the State of New York and before the State Bar of Georgia. Daniel is also admitted to practice before the United States Courts of Appeals for both the 2nd and 11th Circuits. You can learn more about Daniel by checking out his Linkedin profile and his personal page. Read More

Related Articles

• Acceleration Clause Lawyers
• What is Rescission of Contract?
• When Is a Contract Considered Void or Voidable?
• Illegal Contract Lawyers
• Nominal Damages in a Contracts Claim
• Breach of Contract Defense: Laches
• Breach of Contract Defenses: Unclean Hands
• Material Breach of Contract and Lawsuits
• Breaching vs. Non-Breaching Parties in a Contract
• What is a Contract?
• Fraudulent Inducement
• Contract Law: Fraud Cases
• Limitation of Liability Clauses in Construction Contracts
• Homeowners Hiring Unlicensed Contractors
• Business Licenses for Independent Contractors
• State Statute of Limitations for a Breach of Contract Action
• Email Contracts
• Employer Liability for Wage Violations of Subcontractors
• Employee or Independent Contractor?
• Tax Requirements for Independent Contractors
• Statutory Damages in Breach of Contract Cases
• Hiring an Independent Contractor
• Attorney's Fees in Breach of Contract Cases
• What Is the Proper Court for a Breach of Contract Lawsuit?
• Exclusive Dealing Contracts
• Defenses to Breach of Employment Contract
• Real Estate Contracts: Exclusive Right to Sell
• Exculpatory Clauses
• Exterminators Breach of Contract Liability
• Negligent Misrepresentation

Discover the Trustworthy LegalMatch Advantage

• No fee to present your case
• Choose from lawyers in your area
• A 100% confidential service

How does LegalMatch work?

Law Library Disclaimer

16 people have successfully posted their cases

• Practical Law

If a contract is silent on assignment does the law imply that the assignment can only take place with consent?

Practical law resource id a-014-2191  (approx. 3 pages), get full access to this document with a free trial.

Try free and see for yourself how Practical Law resources can improve productivity, efficiency and response times.

About Practical Law

This document is from Thomson Reuters Practical Law, the legal know-how that goes beyond primary law and traditional legal research to give lawyers a better starting point. We provide standard documents, checklists, legal updates, how-to guides, and more.

650+ full-time experienced lawyer editors globally create and maintain timely, reliable and accurate resources across all major practice areas.

83% of customers are highly satisfied with Practical Law and would recommend to a colleague.

81% of customers agree that Practical Law saves them time.

• General Contract and Boilerplate

Assignment and Novation

What are assignment and novation clauses.

The two main legal tools for the transfer of the rights and/or obligations under a contract to another party are: assignment, for the transfer of benefits; and novation, for the transfer of rights/benefits and obligations. Each has unique features that must be taken into account when deciding which is the preferred option.

Assignment and novation clauses

Assignment, novation and other dealings boilerplate clauses, non-assignment clauses, withholding consent to an assignment.

The two main legal tools for the transfer of the rights and/or obligations under a contract to another party are:

• assignment, for the transfer of benefits; and
• novation, for the transfer of rights/benefits and obligations

Each has unique features that must be taken into account when deciding which is the preferred option.

Assignment clauses

A contracting party at common law has a general right to assign its rights without any consent or approval from the other party (unless by its very nature the right is personal). An assignment clause may be included in an agreement to exclude or limit this common law right. In order for the assignment of rights by one party to not be exercised unilaterally without the knowledge of the other party, it is common for contracts to include a provision that a party can only assign its rights under the contract with the consent of the other party.

After assignment, the assignee is entitled to the benefit of the contract and to bring proceedings (either alone or by joining the assignor depending in whether the assignment is legal or equitable) against the other contracting party to enforce its rights. The assignee does not become a party to the contract with the promisor. As the burden or obligations of the contract cannot be assigned, the assignor remains liable post assignment to perform any part of the contract that has not yet been performed.

Novation clauses

By executing a novation, a party can transfer both its rights/benefits and obligations. At common law, the obligations under a contract can only be novated with the consent of all original contracting parties, as well as the new contracting parties. This is because the novation extinguishes the old contract by creating a new contract.

A novation clause will usually provide that a party cannot novate a contract without the prior written consent of existing parties. Including a novation clause in an agreement is designed to prevent oral consent to a novation, or consent being inferred from a continuing party’s conduct. However, a court will look to the substance of what has occurred, and such a clause is not effective in all situations.

It is possible for a novation clause to prospectively authorise a novation to be made by another party unilaterally to a party chosen by the novating party. The courts will give effect to a novation made in this manner provided it is authorised by the proper construction of the original contract.

Option 1 – Assignment, novation and other dealings – consent required

A party must not assign or novate this [deed/agreement] or otherwise deal with the benefit of it or a right under it, or purport to do so, without the prior written consent of each other party [which consent is not to be unreasonably withheld/which consent may be withheld at the absolute discretion of the party from whom consent is sought].

Option 2 – Assignment, novation and other dealings – specifies circumstances in which consent can reasonably be withheld

(a)   [ Insert name of Party A ] may not assign or novate this [deed/agreement] or otherwise deal with the benefit of it or a right under it, or purport to do so, without the prior written consent of [ insert name of Party B ], which consent is not to be unreasonably withheld . 

(b) [ Insert name of Party A ] acknowledges that it will be reasonable for [ insert name of Party B ] to withhold its consent under this clause if:

(i)      [ Insert name of Party B ] is not satisfied with the ability of the proposed assignee to perform [ insert name of Party A ]’s obligations under this [deed/agreement];

(ii)      [ Insert name of Party B ] is not satisfied with the proposed assignee’s financial standing or reputation;

(iii)     the proposed assignee is a competitor of [ insert name of Party B ]; or

(iv)       [ Insert name of Party B ] is in dispute with the proposed assignee .

Click  here  for information on how to use this boilerplate clause.

A non-assignment clause prevents a party or parties from assigning the benefit of the contract. Non-assignment clauses are generally effective if they have been clearly drafted.

Contracts commonly provide for assignment with the consent of the other party. Such provisions usually provide that consent must not be unreasonably withheld and, where there is no such proviso, one may be implied. Accordingly, if it is intended that a party may withhold its consent to an assignment for any reason whatsoever (including on unreasonable grounds) clear contractual language should be used.

A purported assignment that contravenes such contractual restriction may constitute a breach of contract and result in an ineffective assignment.

The ‘reasonableness’ of withholding consent to an assignment is assessed by an objective standard and given a broad and common sense meaning.

The relevant factors in assessing reasonableness will differ in each case and heavily depend on the particular circumstances, including the nature and object of the specific contract and the purpose of the non-assignment clause.  Relevant factors may include any defaults in obligations under the contract and the solvency and identity of the assignee.

A party’s actions in withholding consent will generally be considered unreasonable if the grounds relied upon to support the withholding are:

• extraneous or disassociated from the subject matter of the contract;
• materially inconsistent with any provision(s) of the contract; or
• based on collateral or improper considerations.

It is advisable, where withholding consent to an assignment, to clearly set out the reasons for withholding consent in a letter to the other party.

Contract types explained

• Non-disclosure agreements (NDA)
• Letter of intent (LOI) or Memorandum of understanding (MOU)
• Alliance or collaboration agreements
• Joint venture agreement (JVC)
• Sales agreements explained
• Long-term supply agreements
• Manufacturing agreements
• Distribution agreements
• (Commercial) agency agreements
• Trademark license agreements
• Amendment agreements, supplements and addenda
• Shareholder and board resolutions and powers of attorney

Contract clauses explained

• Definitions in contracts – 22 best practice rules
• Standard words and phrases ‘defined’
• Conditions in contracts
• Licensing intellectual property
• Covenants in contracts vs obligations
• Representations and warranties - sense and all nonsense
• Limitations of liability in contracts
• Indemnity clauses (for infringements)
• Hardship clauses - Changed circumstances or imprévision
• Force majeure clauses
• Confidentiality clauses
• Subcontracting clauses in contracts
• Amendments clause
• Announcements clauses

Assignment or no-assignment of contracts?

• Counterparts
• Entire agreement clauses
• No general conditions to apply
• Independent contractors (‘no partnership established’)
• Language clauses (translations)
• Notices clauses
• Severability
• No termination or dissolution
• Time is of the essence
• Waiver clauses
• Applicable law clauses
• Choosing court or arbitration in contracts?
• Arbitration or expert determination in a contract?
• Arbitration clauses; arbitration institute or ad hoc arbitration?
• ADR: mediation, dispute boards and escalation in contracts

Contract law explained

• What is a contract?
• Practices and usages in contracts
• Contract interpretation and legal culture
• Signing a contract, notarisation, legalisation and apostilles
• INCOTERMS explained
• Letters of credit (L/C), bank guarantees or documentary collection
• Unidroit Principles of International Commercial Contracts
• Freedom of contract in the Unidroit principles
• Good faith (and fair dealing) explained
• Practices and usages in contract performance
• Inconsistent behaviour (venire contra factum proprium) and contracts
• Introduction to CISG (Convention on contracts for the international sale of goods)
• Scope of CISG and its general provisions explained
• Passing of ownership and risk in a sales contract
• Fundamental breach and avoidance (termination)
• Product conformity, fitness for purpose
• Third-party claims
• Obligations of the buyer in international sales
• Remedies for breach of contract
• Intellectual property - introduction
• Copyright in contracts
• Trademarks in contracts
• Know-how and trade secrets
• Patents and patent licences
• Software and license agreements
• General principles of intellectual property law

Contract wording: best practices

• Doublets and triplets: synonyms and hendiadyses
• And/or: think first, dear Andorian!
• On an arm’s length basis
• As the case may be
• Best efforts and commercially reasonable endeavours
• Will be ‘deemed’ to be
• Except as otherwise agreed
• For the avoidance of doubt or the sake of clarity
• From time to time
• Hereby in contract clauses
• Herein, thereof, everywhereof in contracts
• In order to (avoid explanations in contracts)
• In the ordinary course of business and consistent with past practice
• Including without limitation in contracts must be avoided
• Intentionally left blank in contracts
• To the maximum extent permitted by law in contract clauses
• ‘Mutual’ is a pleonasm
• Not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed
• Notwithstanding is tricky
• Provided, however, that
• Plural or singular: do not write '(s)' and do not use / slashes in contracts
• Shall or will in contracts (but only one of them)
• Subject to…
• Said, such and links
• ‘The same’ and ‘that certain’ agreement
• Subsidiaries and Affiliates
• Third parties
• To the knowledge of…
• ‘When’, ‘if’ and ‘to the extent that’ in contracts

Contract structure and presentation

• How to set up (structuring) an agreement
• Contract cover page and table of contents
• First part of an agreement
• Preamble (recitals)
• The body of the agreement
• Signature blocks, seals and witnesses
• Schedules to contracts (annexes and exhibits)
• Contract house style: best practices
• Contract fonts, spacing, alignment and margins
• Contract articles, sections and contract clause numbering
• Contracting styles: European versus U.S. style
• Letter agreements and side letters
• Two language contracts

Contract drafting principles (style)

• Plain English in contracts: how to keep it simple and clear
• Numbers in contracts - 18 best practice rules
• References to dates in contracts
• References to time in contracts
• Sentence structure, intonation and ambiguity (the left-right principle)
• Exhaustive vs. conceptual contract style
• Consistency in contracts
• Vague terms in contracts and accuracy
• Contract drafting conventions (sample)
• Contract and document marking conventions

Many contracts will provide for a prohibition to assign the rights and obligations under the agreement – so-called  assignment clauses . Normally, each party should be able to negotiate that the approval of the other party to an assignment will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed:

Assignment. No Party shall assign its rights or obligations under this Agreement in whole or in part, without the prior written approval of the other Party, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed.

Carve-outs allowing assignment . In many cases, the parties would like to make an extra carve-out for intra-group restructurings of activities or the performance under the contract by an affiliate, whether for tax or other geographical reasons. This would be the typical example for the applicability of  shall not be unreasonably withheld .

However, contracting parties may seek more certainty. Uncertainty becomes particularly problematic when a party prepares a divestment of the business. Obviously, when the new investor in such business is a competitor of the customer, the latter’s refusal to unconditionally approve assignment is reasonable. In other cases, the parties want to be free to assign the agreement (i.e. the rights and related obligations) as part of a sale of the entire business to which such agreement relates. The uncertainty may be covered by a specific exception:

…, except that Seller may assign its rights and obligations under this Agreement in connection with a sale of all or a substantial part of its business to which such rights and obligations pertain.

The more complete version will also require a re-assignment in case of divestment of the Affiliated Company and have an additional provision:

Seller shall procure that an assignee Affiliate assigns back the assigned rights and obligations, immediately prior to such assignee ceasing to be an Affiliate of it.

Personal nature of the contract . The exception and related assign-back provision can, of course, accommodate both parties. Note, however, that there is a greater logic that a purchaser does not want to source from its competitors or from suppliers with a questionable background (e.g. suppliers obtaining products manufactured by children or in an environment-polluting way) than vice versa. Child labour or pollution of the environment are matters that a company would typically want to control upwards the product chain and not down. For a discussion of the wording  shall  not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed , click here .

Assignment and transaction financing (pledge) . In case of private equity and other leveraged transactions, the purchaser may need to be able to assign its rights (and obligations) freely under the share purchase agreement, in order to be able to obtain financing more easily. In such case, the seller would keep some control over the financing parts of the transaction by a restrictive assignment clause.

The caveat that assignment shall not unreasonably be withheld or conditioned will give the seller at least the opportunity to review the financing obligations and analyse the potential consequences of an assignment of the rights (and obligations) under the share purchase agreement to the banks and other lenders involved. A relaxed assignment clause facilitating the purchaser would be as follows:

Assignment. No Party may assign or transfer any of its rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written approval of the other Party, except that: (a)   each Party may assign any of its rights under this Agreement to its Affiliates; and (b)   Purchaser may assign any of its rights under this Agreement to any of its lenders or to any person acquiring all or substantially all of the rights or assets of Target after the Completion Date, provided, however, that no such assignment shall relieve an assigning Party of its obligations under this Agreement.  For the avoidance of doubt, Purchaser may grant security interests in its rights under this Agreement to its lenders.

Note that an assignment clause does not relieve the parties to an assignment from fulfilling the requirements of the applicable law to such assigned rights and obligations. In order to give an assignment of rights its full effect (i.e. enforceability against the debtor and an obligation on the debtor to perform vis-à-vis the assignee only) most jurisdictions require a (written) assignment notice to the debtor.

Contract law and assignment of obligations . An assignment of obligations would usually be subject to the consent of the debtor although under English law a distinction is drawn between novation and the assignment of a contract; whereby the latter does not require consent although will only be effective so as to assign the ‘benefit’ and not the ‘burden’ of the contract.

See CFR Section III.5.1 (Art. III. – 5:104 ff.) and compare the U.N. Convention on the Assignment of Receivables in International Trade  (12 December 2004).

Welcome at Weagree

Privacy overview.

Terms of Use

• I shall not consider the model contract as a ‘legal advice’.
• I accept a disclaimer and extensive exclusion of liability in relation to my use of the model contract.
• I shall not resell any downloaded model contract or otherwise ‘commercialise’ it.

• Law of torts – Complete Reading Material
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – September 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 2 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 3 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 5 October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 2 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 3 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 – December 2019
• Sign in / Join

Assignment of contract

This article is written by Neha Dahiya, a law student at Dr. B.R. Ambedkar National Law University, Sonipat. This article explains the meaning, types, and conditions of the assignment of contract. It also seeks to explain the judicial opinion about assignment by the means of a case study. 

This article has been published by Sneha Mahawar .

Table of Contents

Introduction

A contract binds the involved parties to fulfil their obligations. Non-fulfillment of the obligations results in the breach of the contract. Thus, the rights and obligations arising from the contract are owned by the contracting parties. However, in certain cases, these contractual rights and obligations can be transferred to a third party. This is known as the assignment of contract. In a world where the complexity of transactions is increasing continuously, such assignments have become very common. 

Basics of a contract 

Section 2(h) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 defines a contract as “an agreement enforceable by law”. It is characterised by an offer and an acceptance along with consideration and is backed by the power of law. An agreement is a promise by one party to another. A proposal once accepted becomes a promise. The formation of a contract results in rights and obligations for both parties. A lawful contract binds both parties to fulfil their obligations. In case they are not fulfilled, the aggrieved party can avail of the remedies provided by the law. 

Thus, Contract= (Offer + Acceptance) Agreement + Enforceability of law 

For example: ‘A’ promises to sell his house to ‘B’ for a consideration of Rs. 50 lakhs. Here, there was an offer to sell the house by ‘A’ and acceptance by ‘B’ for consideration of a fixed sum. It is a lawful agreement and hence is a contract. Here, ‘A’ has the obligation to give the house to ‘B’ and ‘B’ has an obligation to pay the amount. If either of them fails to fulfil their respective obligation, it will result in a breach of the contract. 

What is assignment of contract 

When the rights and obligations in a contract are transferred to a third party, who is not a party to the contract, it is called the assignment of contract. For example, in the case where there was a contract between ‘A’ and ‘B’ where ‘A’ was supposed to pay ‘B’ some amount, ‘A’ had an obligation to pay ‘B’ the amount and ‘B’ had the right to receive the amount. Along with this, if ‘B’ had to pay the same amount to ‘C’ and he asked ‘A’ to pay the money directly to ‘C’, it can be called an assignment of the obligation by ‘B’ to ‘A’. It is covered in Section 37 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The Section provides that a party can dispense the performance of the contract by the assignment of it to a third party. This concept can also be found in the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 . The use of assignments has increased tremendously in recent times owing to the financial and contractual complexities of the transactions. Usually, it is employed in high-risk transactions that are secured by assigning the contractual rights along with the securities (like hypothecation or mortgage).

The party currently holding the rights and obligations of the existing contract is called the ‘assignor’ and the party to whom they are assigned and taking over the position is called the ‘assignee’. The transfer takes place from the assignor to the assignee. Also, it is pertinent to note that assignment does not affect the rights and responsibilities of the parties involved in any way. These rights and duties remain the same. And even after the transfer, the assignor remains liable if any problems arise unless there was an agreement to the contrary. Thus, the assignment of the contract involves an incorporeal transfer of the rights and obligations. And as per the laws of India, these transfers must be brought onto paper.  

How does assignment of contracts work 

The assignment depends upon several factors including the provisions of the contract entered into by the parties. The original contract may contain a clause that does not permit the assignment or make the consent of the other party necessary before the assignment. The contract can also contain a stipulation that states that the liability of the agreement would lie with the original parties, even after the assignment. This happens in situations where the assignor acts as a guarantor for the performance of duties as per the contract by the assignee. Acting as a guarantor makes the assignor liable. It is also possible that a contract may permit an assignment without any formal notification to the other party. But in this case, it is important for that party to create a ‘Letter of Assignment’ containing the details to notify all other contracting parties. The letter must be signed by both outgoing and incoming parties. 

For example: If ‘A’ and ‘B’ enter into a contract and include a clause that does not allow the assignment of the contract, neither of them can transfer their rights and liabilities to a third party. And if the contract contains a clause that necessitates the requirement of consent, then neither of them can transfer the rights and obligations without the other party’s consent. Also, if ‘A’ decides to assign his obligations to ‘C’ and acts as a guarantor for ‘C’, then also ‘A’ will continue to hold the liability. 

Enforceability of the assignment

Usually, assignments of contract rights and obligations are enforceable. However, under some circumstances, they are not enforced. These are as follows:

• If the provisions of the contract prohibit the assignment of the contract explicitly and it still happens somehow, it will be considered to be void. Such a clause is called an ‘anti-assignment clause’. 
• Sometimes, due to the assignment of contractual rights and obligations, the basics of the contract are altered. In such circumstances, it cannot be considered enforceable. For example, if performance is affected by the assignment, it will probably not be enforced by the court. 
• The assignment will not be enforced if it is illegal or contrary to the law in some or the other way. 

Contracts that can be assigned 

As per Indian law, any kind of contract can be assigned, provided it conforms to the provisions of the contract and is carried out with the consent of the parties involved. Also, for any contract whose foundation lies upon the ‘personal skills’ of the promisor, such a contract cannot be assigned under any circumstances. This is because such a contract depends upon the qualities or qualifications of the promisor only and cannot be found in someone else, thus, the obligations cannot be assigned in such a case. This has also been highlighted by our judiciary that two types of contracts can never be assigned, that are:

• Where the contract is personal in nature.
• Where the assignment of rights is prohibited either by the law or by the contract.

Thus, it is prudence that is followed while deciding the assignability of a contract. It is prudent to explicitly state the conditions regarding assignment in the contract itself, taking due care of the limits placed by the law.  

Who can handle assignment of a contract 

The most competent person to handle the assignment of contract is an attorney. An attorney is a licensed court practitioner who acts as a deputy or the agent of the party he/she is representing in the court of law. Such contracts need professional expertise as they contain some very technical and intricate details that are crucial for the correct and beneficial assignment. 

Types of assignable contracts

As per the common law, the assignment was done by the way of  three kinds of transactions:

• Novation- In simple words, it is an agreement wherein both contracting parties permit the substitution of an existing party with a new one in the contract. Thus, there is a novation of contract where the original party is discharged of its obligations and they are transferred to a new party. This can be called the assignment of contractual obligations. However, there is an essential difference between both. In the assignment, the rights and obligations are transferred from one party to another. But in novation, instead of a transfer, one party substitutes another.  
• Acknowledgment – Where both the parties acknowledge that the interests in the contract can be assigned to a third party in the contract, then the assignment can take place with the consent of both. 
• Power of attorney – It is a legal document that allows a person to appoint someone to organise or manage various affairs including personal and financial. Thus, in a way it is like appointing an agent to conduct professional transactions, settle claims and cater to business demands.

As per the existing laws in India, there are broadly two types of assignment. 

• Legal – A legal assignment is the one that is carried out as per Section 130 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 . it is characterised by all the formalities, intention to assign, communication to the assignee, and notice to the debtor. In this, a proper formal agreement is drafted giving assent to the assignment, as per the procedure laid down by the law. The consent of the party is sought first and a notice is sent. Proper communication is sent to the assignee as well. Finally, with all the formalities done, the assignment is carried out. 
• Equitable – An equitable assignment holds good only in equity and not in the eyes of law. It can be related to a transfer of future benefits which is not enforceable by law. In respect of equitable charges attached to a property, the courts are bound to follow the laws laid down. Thus, as held in B.N. Railway Employees’ Urban Bank v. Seager (1941), an equitable assignment can be created only by a written document as per the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. 

Modes of assignment 

The assignment of contractual rights and liabilities has been covered under Section 130 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 under the heading of ‘actionable claim’. An actionable claim can be transferred simply by the execution of a written instrument. Nothing more is required. The contract permitting assignment must be clearly laid down, strictly adhering to the provisions of this Section. The intention to assign must be clear and certain. Under Indian property laws, a deed is required for the assignment. And this deed must be duly stamped. However, stamp duty is extremely high in India. Also, it is a subject that falls in the concurrent list. So when it is legislated on by both centre and states, it leads to variations and there is no uniformity. This acts as a hindrance in the way of assignment. 

Validity of part-assignment

In the case of Doraisami v. Doraisami (1924), following the English precedent, it was held that if there is an assignment of a debt, the transfer must be of the whole debt and not just a portion of it. Thus, part-assignment was not recognised. However, in the subsequent case of Rajamier v. Subramaniam (1928) , the previous judgement was overruled. It was recognized that even though part-assignment was not recognised in the English common law, part-assignment of debt was a valid transfer as it was held to be good in equity. However, it was also laid down that in such part-assignments, while enforcing a claim, it was necessary to implead the owner of the rest of the portion as well. It was observed that no such distinction was made in the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Thus, both may be transferred under the term ‘actionable claims’. 

However, the only problem that persists is presented by Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. As per this, a single cause of action cannot be allowed to be split into many. Thus, it may prevent the owner of a part of the debt from enforcing his rights. Thus, to avoid this, the lenders often submit a substitution claim or notice in the court so that this provision is not applied. 

Assigning intellectual property 

Assignment of intellectual property implies the transfer of the owner’s rights in copyrights, patents, trade secrets, trademarks, and such other intangible properties. Many times, companies look to sell or transfer their intellectual property because an excess of these can prove to be a burden for them. Maintaining intellectual property requires continuous registrations, defending suits against third-party claims or marketing, and creating a finished product. Thus, such transfers can generate good profit for the company and save it from unnecessary expenditure. On the other hand, several companies look for purchasing such property to provide an impetus to their growth. Thus, when intellectual property is assigned, all the rights, titles, and interests with respect to it are transferred to the assignee from the assignor.  

Assignment of contract in real estate 

The use of assignments in real estate is known as ‘real estate wholesaling’ . As per this, the real estate dealers instead of going by the conventional way of buying and selling the house, enter into a contract and then reassign it to another buyer so as to avoid the additional costs and pocket the profit earned in doing so. This is possible because a real estate purchase agreement does not contain a binding obligation to actually buy the property. Such an agreement is called an ‘Assignment of Real Estate Purchase and Sale’ agreement. Thus, here the assignor merely acts as a middleman, selling their right to buy the property with an equitable interest, i.e. in exchange for an assignment fee from the assignee, who is the ultimate buyer of the property.

Alternatives to assignment of contract 

There are certain other types of transfers that operate as an alternative to assignment. 

They are as follows:

• Licensing- It is an agreement under which a party owning the rights over the property (for example – owning patent rights in case of intellectual property) leases those rights to another, without actually selling or assigning them. Thus, the second party gets a licence to use those rights owned by the first party, for its benefit.  
• Delegation- Delegation basically implies appointing someone else to do the work for you. For example, ‘A’ gets a contract to cut the grass from ‘B’s garden. ‘A’ might delegate the work to ‘C’ without actually assigning the contract to him. But ‘A’ will still control the work and receive the payment. 

Case laws on assignment of contract 

Kapilaben and ors. v. ashok kumar jayantilal sheth through poa gopalbhai madhusudan patel and ors., (2019), facts of the case.

In this case, the appellants here had executed an agreement to sell in 1986 in favour of some of the respondents. The respondents had paid only a portion of the consideration amount. Thereafter, the original buyers, i.e. the respondents executed another agreement to sell in 1987 in respect of the same property in favour of Respondent 1 who was not included in the agreement of 1986. Subsequently, a dispute arose among the parties, and Respondent 1 filed a petition against both the original sellers and buyers seeking specific performance of the 1987 agreement. The petition was dismissed by a trial court citing that the original buyers could not have transferred the contract and assigned their obligation to a third party without the written consent of the original seller. Additionally, there was no evidence suggesting that the seller’s consent was taken. However, the decision was overruled by the High Court of Gujarat. Later on, the matter went to the Supreme Court of India

Issue involved in the case

Was the assignment of obligations by the original buyers to Respondent 1 without the consent of the original seller valid? 

Judgment of the Court

The Supreme Court laid down the following principles in its judgment:

• Assignment of contractual liabilities, where the parties agree to substitute the old contract with a new one where the same responsibilities are transferred to another party is called novation. However, this assignment cannot occur without the consent of the other party to the contract. 
• The rights and obligations under a contract are freely assignable unless the contract is personal in nature or is prohibited by the law. 
• It was finally held that an assignment cannot be held valid just because it is not explicitly prohibited by the provisions of the contract. In order to classify an interest in the contract to be assignable, the terms of the contract and circumstances must be taken into consideration to infer whether the pirates intended to make the interests assignable.

Robinson v. Davison, (1871) 

In this case , the defendant’s wife had promised to play the piano at a concert. However, she failed to perform owing to her bad health. As a result, the plaintiff sued for compensation. 

Issues involved in the case

• Can the plaintiff seek compensation in the present case?
• Could assignment of contract be allowed to a third party?

The Court held that the performance of the present contract depended upon the personal skills of the defendant’s wife, which in turn depended on her good health. Thus, non-performance due to ill-health discharged the contract. Hence, no compensation could be claimed. Also, since the contract was based on the promisor’s personal skills and capability, it could not be assigned to a third party. 

Conclusion 

Assignment of contracts has become a common phenomenon in recent times. However, it is important that the assignments conform to the provisions laid down by the law. It must be carried out with the consent of the contracting parties. There are certain cases where the assignment is not possible like the contracts which are personal in nature, where there is an explicit provision in the contract to prohibit it, or when the law does not allow it in particular cases. These conditions must be adhered to. In fact, our law recognises both legal and equitable assignments. These assignments are covered under the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Thus, all the contracts where the contractual rights and obligations are transferred to a third party are valid, provided all the conditions laid down by law are followed. 

References 

• http://docs.m anupatra.in/newsline/articles/Upload/E915DA6B-361C-493B-91D1-96D8EB703128.pdf
• https://www.thebalancesmb.com/what-is-an-assignment-of-contract-in-a-business-agreement-4587747
• https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/assignment-of-contract-basics-32643.html
• https://www.contractscounsel.com/b/assignment-of-contract  

Students of  Lawsikho courses  regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity

Follow us on  Instagram  and subscribe to our  YouTube  channel for more amazing legal content.

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

State of karnataka vs. union of india (1978), state of u.p. vs. nawab hussain (1977), group of companies doctrine, leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

3-Day Bootcamp (LIVE only) on

How you can use labour law skills to go from HR manager to business leader

Register now

Thank you for registering with us, you made the right choice.

Congratulations! You have successfully registered for the webinar. See you there.

English law assignments of part of a debt: Practical considerations

United Kingdom |  Publication |  December 2019

Enforcing partially assigned debts against the debtor

The increase of supply chain finance has driven an increased interest in parties considering the sale and purchase of parts of debts (as opposed to purchasing debts in their entirety).

While under English law part of a debt can be assigned, there is a general requirement that the relevant assignee joins the assignor to any proceedings against the debtor, which potentially impedes the assignee’s ability to enforce against the debtor efficiently.

This note considers whether this requirement may be dispensed with in certain circumstances.

Can you assign part of a debt?

Under English law, the beneficial ownership of part of a debt can be assigned, although the legal ownership cannot. 1  This means that an assignment of part of a debt will take effect as an equitable assignment instead of a legal assignment.

Joining the assignor to proceedings against the debtor

While both equitable and legal assignments are capable of removing the assigned asset from the insolvency estate of the assignor, failure to obtain a legal assignment and relying solely on an equitable assignment may require the assignee to join the relevant assignor as a party to any enforcement action against the debtor.

An assignee of part of a debt will want to be able to sue a debtor in its own name and, if it is required to join the assignor to proceedings against the debtor, this could add additional costs and delays if the assignor was unwilling to cooperate. 2

Kapoor v National Westminster Bank plc

English courts have, in recent years, been pragmatic in allowing an assignee of part of a debt to sue the debtor in its own name without the cooperation of the assignor.

In Charnesh Kapoor v National Westminster Bank plc, Kian Seng Tan 3 the court held that an equitable assignee of part of a debt is entitled in its own right and name to bring proceedings for the assigned debt. The equitable assignee will usually be required to join the assignor to the proceedings in order to ensure that the debtor is not exposed to double recovery, but the requirement is a procedural one that can be dispensed with by the court.

The reason for the requirement that an equitable assignee joins the assignor to proceedings against the debtor is not that the assignee has no right which it can assert independently, but that the debtor ought to be protected from the possibility of any further claim by the assignor who should therefore be bound by the judgment.

Application of Kapoor

It is a common feature of supply chain finance transactions that the assigned debt (or part of the debt) is supported by an independent payment undertaking. Such independent payment undertaking makes it clear that the debtor cannot raise defences and that it is required to pay the relevant debt (or part of a debt) without set-off or counterclaim. In respect of an assignee of part of an independent payment undertaking which is not disputed and has itself been equitably assigned to the assignee, we believe that there are good grounds that an English court would accept that the assignee is allowed to pursue an action directly against the debtor without needing the assignor to be joined, as this is likely to be a matter of procedure only, not substance.

This analysis is limited to English law and does not consider the laws of any other jurisdiction.

Notwithstanding the helpful clarifications summarised in Kapoor, as many receivables financing transactions involve a number of cross-border elements, assignees should continue to consider the effect of the laws (and, potentially court procedures) of any other relevant jurisdictions on the assignment of part of a debt even where the sale of such partial debt is completed under English law.

Legal title cannot be assigned in respect of part of a debt. A partial assignment would not satisfy the requirements for a legal assignment of section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925.

If an assignor does not consent to being joined as a plaintiff in proceedings against the debtor it would be necessary to join the assignor as a co-defendant. However, where an assignor has gone into administration or liquidation, there may be a statutory prohibition on joining such assignor as a co-defendant (without the leave of the court or in certain circumstances the consent of the administrator).

[2011] EWCA Civ 1083

• Financial institutions

Recent publications

Publication

SCOTUS continues to curtail prosecutors

The Supreme Court of the United States held in Snyder v. United States that 18 U.S.C. § 666 does not apply to gratuities—even those that raise eyebrows and ethical concerns.

United States | July 02, 2024

Applying HIPAA to online tracking technologies: Court finds HHS guidance exceeds authority

In American Hospital Association et al. v. Becerra, the Northern District Court of Texas ruled that HHS acted “in clear excess of HHS’s authority under HIPAA”.

From ballots to business: The UK general election

On July 4, the UK will head to the polls. If a change in government occurs, it would have significant impacts on the business landscape. Employment law, financial regulation, the energy transition, trade deals and technology policy may all be impacted. We consider the impacts of the proposals, the legal implications, and steps businesses may need to take if there is a change in government.

United Kingdom | July 01, 2024

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .

© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023

• Canada (English)
• Canada (Français)
• United States
• Deutschland (Deutsch)
• Germany (English)
• The Netherlands
• Türkiye
• United Kingdom
• South Africa
• Hong Kong SAR
• Marshall Islands
• Nordic region

• Skip to header navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to footer navigation
• What we think

Prohibition of assignment clause did not prevent a transfer of rights by operation of law

The Court of Appeal has held that a clause in a contract that prohibited the parties from assigning their rights under the contract did not prevent one party’s rights being transferred automatically to an insurer by operation of law. The case shines a light on how the courts may interpret a prohibition of assignment clause.

What happened?

What did the court of appeal say, what does this mean for me.

Dassault Aviation SA v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co. Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 5 involved a contract for the sale of two aircraft and spare parts.

Under the contract, which was governed by English law, Dassault Aviation would sell the aircraft to Mitsui Bussan Aerospace (MBA). Under a separate contract (governed by Japanese law), MBA would subsequently on-sell the aircraft to the Japanese Coastguard.

MBA was concerned that, if Dassault delivered the aircraft late to MBA, this would affect delivery times under MBA’s contract with the Coastguard and MBA could be liable for late delivery to the Coastguard.

To protect itself against this risk, MBA took out an insurance policy from Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance (MSI) (which, despite the name, was not connected in any way with MBA). The insurance policy was governed by Japanese law.

As it happened, the aircraft were delivered late. MBA claimed under the insurance policy, and MSI duly paid the claim.

Under article 25 of the Japanese Insurance Act (No. 56 of 2008), where an insurer pays out under a Japanese policy of insurance, the insurer is automatically subrogated to any claim the policyholder may have in connection with the event that led to the pay-out. In other words, the policyholder’s right to claim damages passes automatically to the insurer.

Essentially, the same position applies in England and Wales under the common law. See the box “ What is subrogation? ” for more information.

In this scenario, this would mean that MBA’s right to claim against Dassault for breach of contract (due to the late delivery by Dassault) would pass to MSI, so that MSI could claim directly against Dassault.

However, the sale contract between Dassault and MBA contained the following clause (the assignment prohibition):

“[T]his Contract shall not be assigned or transferred in whole or in part by any Party to any third party, for any reason whatsoever, without the prior written consent of the other Party and any such assignment, transfer or attempt to assign or transfer any interest or right hereunder shall be null and void without the prior written consent of the other Party.”

Dassault argued that the prohibition prevailed and prevented MBA’s rights under the contract from transferring to MSI under the Insurance Act. If correct, this would mean that MSI would have no right to claim against Dassault to recover the amount it had paid out to MBA.

Subrogation is a broad doctrine which essentially states that, if a person (X) pays or discharges a debt or obligation of someone else (Y), then X steps into Y’s shoes and acquires Y’s rights.

Under English law, subrogation applies in a wide range of circumstances, including the following.

• When an insurer pays out to a policyholder . The insurer is subrogated to the policyholder’s rights and can take action in place of the policyholder. For example, an individual might take out buildings and contents insurance on their property and, at some point during the policy term, a leak develops, flooding the property and causing damage. The damage is caused by faulty workmanship by a plumber. The individual may be able to claim against the plumber in negligence but instead claims under their insurance policy. The insurer is subrogated to the claim in negligence against the plumber in place of the individual.
• When a guarantor pays out under a guarantee . For example, a person (X) borrows a sum of money from a lender. Another person (Y) gives a guarantee for X’s obligation to repay the sum. The lender calls on the guarantee and Y repays the sum instead of X. By way of subrogation, Y can bring proceedings against X to claim back the amount Y has paid out to the lender. (This is also described as a right of reimbursement, rather than subrogation.)
• Where a person pays someone else’s secured debt . For example, a person (K) takes out a mortgage loan from a bank, which is secured by a mortgage over K’s property. The mortgage becomes payable, but K’s colleague (L) pays the mortgage off instead of K. Until K reimburses L, L is subrogated to the mortgage security over the property. If K does not reimburse L, L can enforce the mortgage and take possession of the property (and sell it).
• Where an agent pays out for their principal . For example, an individual appoints an agent to negotiate a purchase of land on the individual’s behalf. The purchase contract is settled and the individual is required to pay the purchase price. However, for whatever reason (perhaps for ease), the agent pays the purchase price. The seller transfers the land to the individual. By virtue of subrogation, until the agent is paid back, the agent has all the rights over the land which the seller had before the sale.

Subrogation can be complicated and how it works in practice varies greatly depending on the legal and factual circumstances. In many respects, subrogation is less a doctrine and more a form of remedy which a person who has discharged someone else’s obligations can seek in an appropriate form. The principal point of subrogation is that the person whose obligations have been discharged should not be unjustly enriched by failing to perform those obligations themselves.

However, one common factor to all types of subrogation is that it involves an automatic transfer of rights , which occurs by operation of law and does not require a specific assignment by anyone.

Initially, the dispute was referred to arbitration at the ICC in London. The arbitration panel held (by a majority) that MBA’s rights under the sale contract had transferred to MSI under the Insurance Act.

Dassault appealed to the High Court of England and Wales. The High Court overturned the arbitrators’ decision, finding that the prohibition was wide enough to capture a transfer by operation of law.

The High Court noted the words “by any Party” in the assignment prohibition were ambiguous and needed to be interpreted. It therefore embarked on the traditional process of contractual interpretation that applies when the wording of a contract is unclear. See the box “ How will the court interpret a contract? ” for more information.

It held that the words indicated an element of action or willingness by a Party, and that this was what was required for the prohibition to apply. A transfer would fall outside the prohibition only if it were outside the voluntary control of the transferring party (here, MBA).

In this case, although MBA had not directly assigned its rights to MSI, it had entered willingly into the insurance policy and made a claim under it, with the direct and predictable result that its rights would be transferred to MSI under the Insurance Act. In the High Court’s view, this amounted to an assignment by MBA and was caught by the prohibition.

MSI appealed to the Court of Appeal of England and Wales.

The court re-examined the words “by any Party” and found that they were unambiguous and clear. They covered a transfer effected by a party to the sale contract, but that did not include a transfer that occurred automatically by operation of law (as was the case under the Insurance Act).

The judges disagreed with the High Court’s approach that the key question was whether the transfer was outside MBA’s voluntary control. Rather, it was a simple case of reading the contract to decide whether the transfer had been made by MBA.

It had not. The transfer had taken place automatically under the Insurance Act and so was not prohibited by the assignment prohibition.

In reaching its decision, the court noted that the sale contract between Dassault and MBA contained provisions that specifically contemplated the parties taking out insurance (Dassault insurance against loss or damage to certain specific equipment, and MBA insurance in connection with ferry flight delivering the aircraft).

Although these specific provisions did not cover the insurance policy that MBA had placed with MSI, they did indicate that the parties were happy for insurance to cover the arrangements, suggesting in turn that they understood that rights under the contract might transfer to an insurer.

The court found, therefore, that MBA’s rights had transferred to MSI and the assignment prohibition did not apply.

If the wording of an agreement is clear, the courts will assume that it reflects the parties’ intentions and enforce the literal word of the contract. This will be the case even if the result is unusual or uncommercial.

The only exception to this is where the parties’ agreement is in some way restricted by law. For example, the court may find that a clause is unenforceable as a restraint of trade, a contractual penalty, and unreasonable exclusion or limitation of liability, or an attempt to carry out unlawful acts. In these cases, the courts may be able to strike parts of the contract out to make it work.

However, if the wording of a contract is ambiguous and could have more than one meaning, the court must embark on a process of contractual interpretation (also called construction).

The law on contractual interpretation is now settled, following three landmark cases ( Rainy Sky SA v Kookmin Bank [2011] UKSC 50; Arnold v Britton [2015] UKSC 36; and Wood v Capita Insurance Services Ltd [2017] UKSC 24).

In short, the court will examine the wording of the contract and ascertain what a reasonable person with all the relevant background knowledge at the time of the contract would have understood.

The court will look not only at the text of the contract, but also the surrounding context at the time. This is a single exercise, and the court will not automatically prefer the wording (textualism) over the surrounding circumstances (contextualism) or vice versa. However, the weight the court will give the text and the context will vary depending on the nature and formality of the contract.

If, after doing this, the court finds there is still more than one plausible interpretation of the contract, it will prefer the interpretation that is most consistent with business common sense.

The case shows the importance of formulating any prohibition of assignment provisions properly.

Here, the court felt that the wording of the sale contract was clear. By using the words “by any Party”, the prohibition extended only to direct attempts by a party to assign their rights.

Had those words not appeared (e.g. “[T]his Contract shall not be assigned or transferred in whole or in part to any third party…”), the court may have been required to embark on a deeper analysis of the clause to understand whether it would have prohibited transfers by operation of law. Indeed, the court might have concluded that it would have done so.

The case revolved around automatic transfers under Japanese law. The position might well be different under English law. This point was not argued – both Dassault and MSI appear to have accepted that, had the contract been governed by English law, the transfer of rights to MSI would have taken place – and so the court did not need to decide the issue.

But that does not mean that it is impossible to exclude the right to subrogation through a prohibition of assignment, and contract parties may wish to ensure any contractual prohibitions are worded broadly enough that they at least make an attempt to do so.

However, whether this is appropriate will need to be judged on a case-by-case basis, and may be more obviously covered by agreeing a subrogation waiver. For example, it is very common for a buyer of a business to deploy warranty and indemnity (W&I) insurance and for the seller(s) to require the W&I insurer to expressly waive any rights of subrogation.

Conversely, most liability insurance policies contain an express obligation on the insured party not to enter into any agreement with a third party that might restrict the insurer’s right of recovery. A prohibition of assignment that excludes a right of subrogation may do exactly that and could, in theory, invalidate the insurance policy itself.

Where insurance arrangements are contemplated under a contract, the parties should have a mind to the potential implications from an insurance-law perspective, including any potential subrogation following a claim under an insurance policy.

Any contractual provisions that do contemplate insurance are unlikely to stipulate a particular governing law for the insurance, so it may not be possible to make an informed assessment. In addition, the party taking out insurance may well not inform the other party that they are doing so and/or might take out insurance of a type not contemplated by the contract.

In each case, this could lead to a contract party facing legal proceedings under the contract by a third party whose identity is not known at the date of the contract.

Ultimately, where a contract party intends in advance to procure insurance in relation to the subject matter of the contract, it is important to seek legal advice to ensure that the policy and the contract operate smoothly and clearly alongside each other.

Access the court’s decision on whether a contract prohibited an assignment by operation of law ( Dassault Aviation SA v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co. Ltd [2024] EWCA Civ 5)

Get in touch

Dominic Sedghi

Christopher Charlton

Madison Isted

Related services

Stay in the know

Receive our insights directly into your inbox.

This website uses cookies

We use cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. Cookies enhance site navigation, analyse site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts.

To understand more about how we use cookies or to change your cookie preferences, click on “ Show   settings ”. By clicking “ Accept cookies ,” you agree to the storing of cookies on your device.

Your privacy

When you visit any website, it may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies. This information might be about you, your preferences or your device and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to. The information does not usually directly identify you, but it can give you a more personalised web experience.

Because we respect your right to privacy, below you will find descriptions on the types of cookies used on this site and options to opt out where preferred. Please note blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the site and the services we are able to offer.

These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms.

You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable information.

These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site.

All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not know when you have visited our site, and will not be able to monitor its performance.