non assignment mean

What is an Anti-Assignment Clause?

When business owners are negotiating contracts to gear up for the sale of their business, they are rightly concerned with key questions such as the sale price for the business including assets such as how much the sale will cost them and what happens if something goes wrong.  At the end of the contracts, there are usually several pages of type that usually look like boilerplate. Inside those clauses is usually something called an assignment clause, or more accurately, an anti-assignment clause.

It’s one of those clauses that everyone glosses over – after all, it’s just standard legal text, right?

For a business owner hoping to sell their business, an anti-assignment clause can dissuade potential buyers and play a crucial role in the selling price of a business.  If this sounds familiar and you’re in the process of negotiating the merger or acquisition of your business, read on – we’ve put together a practical guide to anti-assignment clauses and what to look out for.

Looking for legal help? feel free to get in touch with our  commercial lawyers  for matters related to contracts.

What is an assignment clause?

The anti-assignment clause states that neither party can transfer or assign the agreement without the consent of the other party. On a basic level, that makes sense – after all, if you sign a contract with a specific party, you don’t expect to be entering into an agreement with a third party you didn’t intend to be.

However, when you sell your business, you will want to transfer ownership of those contracts to the buyer. If your contracts all contain an anti-assignment clause, they effectively restrict you from transferring ownership to the interested party. Now, you’re presented with a new challenge altogether – before you can focus on the sale of your business, you must first renegotiate the terms of your contracts with each party.

Language to look out for in anti-assignment clauses

If you’re thinking about selling your business or even have potential buyers interested, it’s better to know in advance if you’ve got anti-assignment clauses in your contracts. There are generally two types of anti-assignment clause to look out for. The first relates to the complete bar on assignment of rights and responsibilities and is typically worded in this way, or similar:

“Neither Party may assign, delegate, or transfer this agreement or any of its rights or obligations under this agreement.”

The second type prevents the transfer of rights or duties without prior written consent of the other party. This will read along the lines of:

 “Neither this agreement nor any right, interest, or obligation herein may be assigned, transferred, or delegated to a third party without the prior written consent of the other party, and whose consent may be withheld for any reason.”

So, where the first prohibits assignment altogether, the second prohibits assignment unless permission is sought in advance. Some clauses may even explicitly state that a change of control such as a merger or acquisition is an assignment. The last thing you want is to cause a dispute by breaching the contract, but if you’ve already agreed to these terms, you’ll have to open a fresh set of negotiations with the contracting party before you sell the company.

Assignment clauses in M&A: what’s the problem?

Due diligence is the bread and butter of any merger or acquisition. Rather than a leap of faith, due diligence ensures the purchase of a business is a calculated decision with minimal risk to the buyer. Typically carried out by specialist lawyers, the process is designed to lift the hood on the target business to determine the valuation of assets and liabilities and identify any glaring issues that could leave the buyer open to risk.

During the due diligence process, the buyer will look through all of the major contracts the business has open, and specifically keep a close eye out for assignment clauses.

Despite the virtual environment that many businesses have been forced to operate in in 2020, most companies will have commercial leases for the premises from which they typically work. Almost all leases have an anti-assignment clause, and this is a perfect example of an instance that is often overlooked by commercial tenants when selling a business which includes a leasehold property.  This transfer of ownership may well be prohibited under an anti-assignment clause so that prior to the sale of the business, you would be required to ask permission from your landlord. The issue here is that the landlord may well see this as the perfect opportunity to renegotiate and secure a better deal for themselves. What’s worse, if they don’t sign off on the transfer, you’ll have an obstruction on your hands that will stand in the way of the sale.

In any case, an unexpected anti-assignment clause usually winds up being a last-minute hitch in the sale, and it never comes at a good time. Whether it delays the sale or obstructs it altogether, overlooking an anti-assignment clause can cost you considerably in an M&A transaction.

What makes anti-assignment clauses enforceable?

Generally speaking, an anti-assignment clause will be enforced by the courts if it was agreed upon by both parties to the contract. Many contracts exclude or qualify the right to assignment – according to the courts, a clause that states 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.

Courts won’t always enforce assignments to which the counterparty did not give permission, even where there is no anti-assignment clause that specifies this provision.

How to negotiate anti-assignment clauses

The best practice for business owners is to be vigilant when negotiating new contracts and ensure that any anti-assignment clauses still allow for the transfer of ownership when they decide to sell the business.

Remember, even though the buyer is purchasing the assets of the business, this usually means that all of the contracts of the business go with it because the business remains intact. Therefore, the best way forward is to negotiate these clauses upfront from the outset of the relationship, so that when you do decide to sell your business, you automatically have permission to transfer the ownership without having to delay the sale by entering into fresh negotiations.

If your agreement does not permit assignments, it’s worth seeking the advice and support of a specialist lawyer who can help protect your interests through negotiation with your counterparty on this point. You may be able to include a provision that allows for assignment of your rights and obligations upon the prior written consent of the other party. Your lawyer will likely advise you to carve out a specific provision to prohibit the counterparty from unreasonably withholding or delaying consent or making it subject to unreasonable conditions – an issue which, if not provided for within the contract, can cause serious delay and disruption to the sale of your business. Further, it may be beneficial to add an extra element to the contract that makes exceptions to the clause for assignments between affiliates.  If you’re planning to sell your business, this would be the right place to carve out an exception within the clause to the change of control via a merger or acquisition.

It’s important to bear in mind that anti-assignment clauses tend to be viewed narrowly by courts, and that there have been several instances whereby anti-assignment clauses have not been enforced since the clause itself did not explicitly state that the assignment of rights, duties or payment would render the contract void or invalid. So, if you’re in the process of negotiating an agreement and wish to protect your interests through the addition of an anti-assignment clause, it’s critical that you include the consequences of assignment within the clause itself and state that assignments would invalidate or be in breach of the contract.

If you do not wish for the counterparty to be able to transfer the legal obligation to perform their duties as stated in the contract to a third party, this must be explicitly stated in one of three ways:

• Specify the need for consent

There’s no need to be unreasonable – you can protect your interests while still giving the counterparty the space to re-negotiate should they wish to assign rights by including a clause that asks for consent.

• Provide an exemption to consent for affiliates, successors or new owners

Ask your lawyer to draft an exception into the clause that permits assignment to affiliates or successors to the counterparty, such as:

“Neither party may assign or delegate this agreement or its rights or obligations under this agreement without the prior written consent of the other party, except that no consent is required (a) for assignment to an entity in which the transferring party will own greater than 50 per cent of the shares or other interests; or (b) in connection with any sale, transfer, or disposition of all or substantially all of its business or assets; provided that no such assignment will relieve an assigning party of its obligations under this agreement. Any assignment or delegation that violates this provision shall be void.”

• Require reasonable consent

Just as you would not wish for consent to be held back from you unreasonably in the renegotiation of contract terms prior to a sale, your assignment clause should make clear that you will not unreasonably withhold or delay consent should the third party request permission to assign their legal obligations. This may read something like this:

 “Neither party may assign or delegate this agreement or its rights or obligations under this agreement without the prior written consent of the other party, whose consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Any assignment or delegation that violates this provision shall be void.”

Whatever the circumstances, we strongly recommend calling upon a contract law specialist, whether you’re undergoing due diligence in the run up to an M&A transaction, are considering selling your business or are negotiating new contracts with customers and suppliers. Our lawyers bring in-depth expertise in the area of anti-assignment clauses and will work closely with you to protect your interests and ensure no clauses in your contracts negatively impact the sale of your company.

For a free consultation, get in touch with our team through the contact form below or using our online chat service.

Join our Newsletter

• Book Consultation

Newsletter Sign-Up

Please enter your name and email to receive our latest newsletter.

Sign up to our newsletter Sign up to our legal update service

Please fill in the fields below to receive your free download.

English (UK) Portuguese (Brazil) Spanish (Spain) French (France) German Italian Polish Dutch Chinese (China)

Connect with us on LinkedIn

Global LinkedIn Page

Error: Contact form not found.

Arrange a Meeting

Schedule a 30 minute introductory consultation to discuss your legal requirements:

Select your Location    Australia    China    Hong Kong    India    Indonesia    Japan    Malaysia    New Zealand    Pakistan    Philippines    Singapore    South Korea    Thailand    Vietnam    Austria    Bahrain    Belgium    Bulgaria    Cameroon    Croatia    Cyprus    Czech Republic    Denmark    Egypt    Finland    France    Germany    Greece    Hungary    Iceland    Iran    Iraq    Ireland    Israel    Italy    Jersey    Jordan    Kenya    Latvia    Lebanon    Lithuania    Luxembourg    Mozambique    Netherlands    Nigeria    North Macedonia    Norway    Oman    Poland    Portugal    Romania    Saudi Arabia    Serbia    Slovakia    Slovenia    South Africa    Spain    Sweden    Switzerland    Tunisia    Turkiye    UAE    Uganda    United Kingdom    Argentina    Brazil    Chile    Colombia    Costa Rica    Mexico    Peru    Canada    USA

Sign up to our newsletter

Rethinking the “No Assignment” Provision

27 November 2023 20 November 2012 | Ken Adams

In this post , Brian Rogers explains how, as an experiment in crowdsourcing contract language, he has posted on Quora ( here ) his candidate for “the best anti-assignment provision in a contract ever.” He says that it’s “probably lifted” from Negotiating and Drafting Contract Boilerplate (Tina Stark ed. 2003) ( NDCB ). Here’s Brian’s provision:

Neither party may assign any of its rights under this agreement, either voluntarily or involuntarily, whether by merger, consolidation, dissolution, operation of law, or any other manner, except with the prior written consent of the other party. Neither party may delegate any performance under this agreement, except with the prior written consent of the other party. Any purported assignment of rights or delegation of performance in violation of this section is void.

It so happens that I’ve been idly contemplating shortcomings in standard no-assignment language. That’s something that I’ve tackled previously ( here ), and Brian’s post prodded me to revisit the topic.

I’ll start by offering the following comments on Brian’s provision:

• In the interest of consistency I prefer using “shall not” for language of prohibition, but that’s something I’m still exploring. Using “neither party may” works too.
• If you provide for the possibility of consent, it would be safest to assume that consent can’t be unreasonably withheld. If you have a problem with that, omit any mention of consent.
• Isn’t “voluntarily or involuntarily” needless elaboration, analogous to saying “I don’t eat fish, whether fresh-water or salt-water”?
• To avoid having to be all encompassing (“or in any other manner”), I’d use “including”.
• You might want to make it clear whether the prohibition applies to mergers regardless of whether the party is the surviving or disappearing entity (see this post ).
• The distinction between assigning rights and delegating obligations is pointless; in this context, “assign” and “delegate” constitute what I call “misapplied terms of art” (see this post ). Because the provision refers to what is being assigned and delegated, a generic alternative to both words would work just as well, and I opt for “transfer”. Regarding that choice, NDCB , at 56, says, “The problem, however, is that there are reams of cases that analyze ‘assign,’ but not ‘transfer.’ If ‘transfer’ were used alone, the precedential value of the existing cases might be compromised. Moreover, the cases already question the meaning of ‘transfer.'” This doesn’t worry me, as the context makes it clear what’s going on.
• It’s unclear what “rights” refers to. (I don’t use the word “rights” anywhere in MSCD .) I think it refers to discretion granted to a party under an agreement and any remedy that a party has under an agreement, and I’d rather make that explicit.
• By referring to delegation of performance rather than delegation of obligations, Brian’s provision seeks to reflect that a party might delegate not only a duty but also a condition. See NDCB at 26, 74. But I think it’s unrealistic to expect readers to deduce that nuance from a reference to delegation of performance; it would be better to make it explicit.
• The last sentence is language of policy. I suggest that because it relates to a contingent future event, most native English speakers would say “will be void” rather than “is void”.

So here’s my initial version (it’s certain to change) [ Updated 9 August 2016: Language tidied up]:

Except with the prior written consent of the other party, each party shall not transfer, including by merger (whether that party is the surviving or disappearing entity), consolidation, dissolution, or operation of law, (1) any discretion granted under this agreement, (2) any right to satisfy a condition under this agreement, (3) any remedy under this agreement, or (4) any obligation imposed under this agreement. Any purported transfer in violation of this section X will be void.

Because my version makes explicit what Brian’s version only alludes to, it’s longer, but not by much (85 words versus 72 words).

I’ve posted my version on Quora, under Brian’s. (Hey, Brian! In. Yo. Face!) But crowdsourcing is still no way to identify optimal contract language. In particular, I wouldn’t rely on contract language select by haphazard vote. Instead, what you have here is the usual process of Brian, me, and others hashing stuff out. I look forward to having readers point out the weaknesses in my version.

[ Updated 27 November 2023: Bear in mind that in some contexts—notably bankruptcy—no-transfer provisions are unenforceable by law. See my 2014 article on termination-on-bankruptcy provisions, here .]

About the author

Ken Adams is the leading authority on how to say clearly whatever you want to say in a contract. He’s author of  A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting , and he offers online and in-person training around the world. He’s also chief content officer of LegalSifter, Inc., a company that combines artificial intelligence and expertise to assist with review of contracts.

17 thoughts on “Rethinking the “No Assignment” Provision”

I have several concerns here. First, I have never been happy with the “each party shall not” formulation. I don’t mind “may not,” or better yet, “no party may,” but if you really want to use “shall not,” then I recommend “a party shall not” as being less awkward and contrary to normal usage.

Second, I’m surprised that you would allow “by operation of law” to survive here. For the most part, this phrase is used to refer to the “automagic” continuation of the disappearing company’s contracts under the aegis of the surviving company in a merger, in which case the language is redundant when you’ve already discussed mergers. Moreover, if this language relates to some other operations of law, for example an order of a bankruptcy court, it’s rather hubristic to think a contract can trump the ruling authority. Better, if it’s such a big deal, to handle the consequences of such a mandated transfer by giving the affected party an explicit termination right (without the nasty consequences of breach).

Third, in my experience the issues surrounding “delegation” are not only that it’s a misapplied term of art, but that it mistakes the transfer of a contractual obligation for a subcontracting of its performance. In fact, reliance on delegation or transfer is misplaced if one is concerned about subcontracting (since it doesn’t really amount to a transfer of any contractual obligation, only having that obligation physically performed by someone else). A drafter should inquire carefully what the client is really concerned about here, and if it’s subcontracting, that should be explicitly mentioned.

Ah, thank you Vance. I thought My discomfort with ‘delegate’ was a translation issue from US to UK English. I,too, Think that is the wrong word to use.

“No purported transfer of one or more of the following arising from this agreement will be valid without prior written consent of the other party: (1) discretion, (2) right to satisfy a condition, (3) remedy under this agreement, and (4) obligation.”

Other than light trimming, the principal thing this version does is dump the duty not to transfer and go solely with the avoidance of purported transfers. Why prohibit killing the dead?

Because failure to comply with a prohibition gives rise to a remedy; voiding purported transfers doesn’t. I can imagine situations where that might be significant.

No one can fail to comply with a prohibition against transfer when purported transfers are void. Void transfers are non-transfers. Killing the dead isn’t wicked, it’s just impossible.

It’s wicked and depraved! Actually, what happens if Acme makes a purported assignment that results in costly and protracted litigation? Widgetco would like to be able to go after Acme. Wouldn’t that be easier if Widgetco could point to breach? Should the obligation refer to not attempting to transfer?

“Any purported transfer by Acme, without Widgetco’s advance written consent, of one or more of Acme’s rights or obligations under this agreement will be void and will constitute a breach of this agreement.”

This game is based so much on underlying US laws on the meaning of assignment, merger, etc, that it is impossible for a non-US lawyer to participate. We don’t generally have mergers where a party disappears into a puff of smoke. A sale of a business [nearly] always happens by a sale of shares or a sale of assets.

I think the concept of assigning rights under a contract is well established in case law and using different terminology is reinventing the wheel.

I think the “if you do it despite the prohibition, it will be void” concept is strange, but one that I have seen before in US contracts. I don’t think it works, under English law, in respect of prohibitions on assignments of IP. I am doubtful whether it works for assignments of rights under contracts.

For what it is worth, my English law version would be very different and would simply say:

Neither party may assign any rights, or transfer any obligations, under this agreement, without the prior written agreement of the parties.

I have used the word “agreement” rather than “consent” to try to avoid case law on whether a term should be implied that consent should not be unreasonably withheld. The terminology of assignment and transfer is based on a House of Lords case, Linden Gardens v Lenesta Sludge – see http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1993/4.html

As usual, caselaw is of less interest to me than the scope for confusion. I suspect that if you ask many lawyers what is meant by assignment of rights under a contract, you’d get quite a variety of answers.

Okay, Ken I’ll take your word for it. English lawyers who keep Chitty on Contracts under their pillows won’t be so variegated

Mark: Regarding your statement, “I think the ‘if you do it despite the prohibition, it will be void’ concept is strange, but one that I have seen before in US contracts,” consider the probable source of such provisions:

Since U.S. contract law is the province of the states, we have the high court of each of the 50 states reviewing the handiwork of probably twice that number of state appellate courts, which in turn have reviewed the work of probably thousands of trial courts. In addition, we have almost 90 federal district courts trying to predict how the supreme courts of the various states would rule if they were hearing the contracts cases that have fallen into the laps of the federal courts due to accidents of jurisdiction, plus the dozen courts of appeals and the Supreme Court. Then there are specialty federal courts such as the bankruptcy and tax courts which provide an additional source of cases for the federal district and appellate courts to review. And did I mention the extensive administrative law system that probably dwarfs all of the above in scope and which I’m sure has plenty to say about contracts?

Somewhere, sometime in the distant past one of those courts had an unfortunate fact pattern and, wanting to avoid the effect of an anti-assignment provision, decided that although the purported assignment was a breach of the contract in which it was found, the assignment was still effective. Other courts picked up on the work-around, and commercial lawyers have all been covering that base ever since.

Thanks Brian, interesting insight. I would have posted on your site but For the reasons given above I didn’t have a useful contribution.

• Pingback: Koncision » Quora as a Source of Misinformation

The language as being quoted from Negotiating and Drafting Boilerplate is incomplete. Here is the full language, along with explanations of some of the text. Many of my points will be at odds with those of Ken and arise because of differences in drafting philosophy.

Assignment and Delegation.

(a) No Assignments. No party may assign any of its rights under this Agreement, except with the prior written consent of the other party. [That party shall not unreasonably withhold its consent.] All assignments of rights are prohibited under this subsection, whether they are voluntary or involuntary, by merger, consolidation, dissolution, operation of law, or any other manner. For purposes of this Section,

(i) a “change of control” is deemed an assignment of rights; and

(ii) “merger” refers to any merger in which a party participates, regardless of whether it is the surviving or disappearing corporation.

(b) No Delegations. No party may delegate any performance under this Agreement.

(c) Consequences of Purported Assignment or Delegation. Any purported assignment of rights or delegation of performance in violation of this Section is void.

1. The provision is divided into three separate subsections, each dealing with a different topic. A long provision violates the so-called “three-line rule.” Sentences longer than three lines are hard for the reader to take in. Also, by separating assignment from delegation, the drafter is reminded that each of these provisions may need to be elaborated based on facts. (Perhaps delegation is permitted subject to certain conditions.)

2. Generally, exceptions should not begin a sentence. The usual rule is to state the rule – so that the reader has context – and then state the exception. This is also helpful if the sentence contains multiple exceptions that the drafter might want to tabulate.

3. I prefer “No party may” to “Each party shall not.” The sentence’s purpose is to express a prohibition that applies to all – no one can do it. In this context, a negative subject is appropriate: no party/neither party. When using a negative subject “may” is correct. “Shall not” works perfectly well when the subject of the sentence is a single party. “Sam shall not borrow any money.”

4. As to whether consent can be unreasonably withheld is a matter of state law. Some states read into a provision that grants discretionary authority an implied promise of good faith and fair dealing, stated differently, they read in reasonableness. Others do not imply a reasonableness requirement. For example, in New York, landlords may be unreasonable in denying consent to assignment.

5. Courts seriously dislike anti-assignment provisions. They view them as interfering with the free flow of commerce. They insist that if a particular assignment is to be prohibited, it must be listed. For example, if a provision prohibits the assignment of rights, the issue arises as to whether the provision prohibits the assignment of rights by merger. In all states that I’ve checked, unless the assignment by merger is explicitly prohibited, it’s permitted. The courts are rather adamant. They’ll turn their decisions inside out to find the anti-assignment provision unenforceable. They don’t like them and if the provision isn’t explicit, the courts will say that if the parties had really wanted to prohibit assignments by merger, they knew how to use their words. “Voluntarily or involuntarily” is used consistent with these cases.

6. Drafters have tried multiple ways to create all-inclusive provisions, but the courts reject them as not having been specific. “or in any other manner” was blessed by one court, so it’s used in the provision. Another court rejected the phrase “or by any other transfer,” stating that it did not know what “transfer” meant and it therefore could not act as an omnibus savings provision.

7. An anti-assignment provision should also address whether a change of control is deemed an assignment. If Parent Company A sells all of its issued and outstanding shares in Subsidiary A to Buyer Company, Subsidiary A becomes a wholly-owned subsidiary of Buyer Company. Nothing has happened at the Subsidiary A level; there’s been no assignment. Courts hold that unless the change of control is expressly prohibited, it does not rise to the level of an assignment. This prohibition can generally be accomplished in one of two ways: either through a definition, as in the stated provision, or by including a change of control as a default.

8. Assignment and delegation are terms of art, not misapplied terms of art. The Restatement (Second) of Contracts carefully defines them, as do legions of cases. Unfortunately, some lawyers are unfamiliar with them because their contracts courses didn’t cover them. That doesn’t mean new words should be created.

9. Rights are the flip-side of an obligation. If I have an obligation to pay you $100, you have a right to my performance. The transfer of the right to performance is what the assignment is all about. It’s technical. Using terms in a technical way creates precision. If one has discretionary authority, that is a colloquial right but not a contract right. That’s the reason why “right” is not used to signal discretionary authority. Instead, the correct verb to signal discretionary authority is “may”. Incorrect: The publisher has the right to reject the book. Correct: The publisher may reject the book.

Rights can also refer to remedies, but that is consistent with the definition of rights. If a party has a right to have its deposit returned, the flipside obligation is the obligation to return it. If a party has a right to an injunction, the flipside obligation is the promise not to contest the right to the injunction.

10. “Will be void” v. “is void.” I can’t get too excited about this issue. I start from the premise that the contract should always read as if it presently applies and that, therefore, the present tense is correct.

11. Subsection (c) is another consequence of the courts’ dislike for anti-assignment provisions. Mere prohibition does not void the assignment. The courts draw a distinction between the “right” to assign and the “power” to assignment. A flat prohibition merely prohibits the assignment of the right to assignment. Violation of the prohibition is a breach, like any other contract breach. The assignment is enforceable, but gives rise to damages. Unfortunately, the nonassigning party often has trouble finding damages to claim. What difference does it make to whom it pays money? If the nonassigning party’s performance is somehow changed, then damages might be claimed. To make the purported assignment unenforceable, a provision must take away the “power” to assign. That is accomplished through language along the lines of subjection (c).

Tina: Thanks; some readers might find that extract helpful.

More generally, the only drafting philosophy I buy into is identifying the clearest contract language.

Do you see any issues with making the transfer voidable by the non-transferring party instead of void ab initio?

• Pingback: Koncision » What Is a Contract “Right”?

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

The voice that matters.

Innovative scholarship. Extensive writings. Hundreds of  Drafting Clearer Contracts  presentations around the world. Commitment. That’s what makes Ken Adams the unmatched authority on clearer contract language.

164 Brompton Road Garden City, NY 11530-1432

(516) 318-6956

[email protected]

© 2024 Kenneth A. Adams

• Practical Law

Contract: non-assignment clause

Practical law uk legal update 0-380-4831  (approx. 5 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
• Collateral Warranties and Third Parties

No assignment or delegation

No assignment or delegation clause samples

14.6     No Assignment or Delegation. No party may assign any right or delegate any obligation hereunder, including by merger, consolidation, operation of law, or otherwise, without the written consent of the other parties hereto; provided, that such assignment shall not prevent or impede the Acquisition Merger from qualifying for the Intended Tax Treatment. Any purported assignment or delegation that does not comply with the immediately preceding sentence shall be void, in addition to constituting a material breach of this Agreement.

09/10/2020 (Chelsea Worldwide Inc.)

Section 5.12 No Assignment or Delegation. No Party may assign any right or delegate any obligation hereunder, including by merger, consolidation, operation of law, or otherwise, without the written consent of the all of the other Parties and any purported assignment or delegation without such consent shall be void, in addition to constituting a material breach of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be binding on the permitted successors and assigns of the Parties.

11/01/2019 (Lone Star Value Management LLC)

Section9. Binding Effect; No Assignment or Delegation. This Pledge Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Pledgor, the Pledgee and their respective successors and assigns, except that the Pledgor may not assign or transfer its rights hereunder without the prior written consent of the Pledgee (which consent shall not unreasonably be withheld). Each duty or obligation of the Pledgor to the Pledgee pursuant to the provisions of this Pledge Agreement shall be performed in favor of any person or entity designated by the Pledgee, and any duty or obligation of the Pledgee to the Pledgor may be performed by any other person or entity designated by the Pledgee.

06/06/2016 (Ottawa Bancorp Inc)

Section 10.16 No Assignment or Delegation. No Party may assign any right or delegate any obligation hereunder, including by merger, consolidation, operation of law, or otherwise, without the written consent of the all of the other Parties and any purported assignment or delegation without such consent shall be void, in addition to constituting a material breach of this Agreement. Notwithstanding this restriction, the Buyer may assign this Agreement to an affiliate that effectuates the Roll-Up Transactions (the “Permitted Assignee”). In the event of any assignment to the Permitted Assignee, the capitalization of the Assignee shall be identical to the capitalization of the Buyer as provided for in this Agreement (only with such changes as are not adverse to the Sellers and do not diminish any rights to which the Sellers were otherwise entitled) and all other representations and warranties of the Buyer shall be true and correct as they apply to the Permitted Assignee, and the Buyer shall continue to be bound by the terms of this Agreement as a primary obligor hereunder such that should the Permitted Assignee fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, the Sellers and Sellers’ Representative shall be entitled to pursue performance against the Buyer. This Agreement shall be binding on the permitted successors and assigns of the Parties; provided, however, no such assignment will relieve any Party of their obligations under this Agreement.

11/05/2020 (HARVEST HEALTH & RECREATION INC.)

Cut contract prep time in half for free

Build document automations that allow you, your staff, and your clients to auto-populate contract templates.

“ I've found it very easy to use. It allows me to work quickly, get something straight from my head and out into the public.”

Partner, Siskind Susser PC

2500 Executive Parkway Suite 300 Lehi, Utah 84043 (866) 638-3627

Level 11, 1 Margaret Street Sydney NSW 2000 Australia +61 2 8310 4319

8th Floor South Reading Bridge House George Street Reading RG1 8LS +44 20 3129 9324

Latin America

Mexico +52 55 5985 3005

Brazil +55 21 4040 4623

• How to Successfully Switch Your DMS
• DocuSign + NetDocuments
• How Ice Miller Adopted the Cloud Completely Remote
• Case Studies
• Resource Library
• Partner Integrations
• App Directory
• Locate a Partner
• Partner Portal
• Become a Partner

© NetDocuments Software, Inc.

• Terms of Use
• Privacy policy
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy for california residents

Are Anti-Assignment Clauses Enforceable?

Written by: Brittainy Boessel

July 22, 2020

8 minute read

Contracts, in general, are freely assignable, which means that either party can transfer its contractual obligations or rights to a third party. But sometimes contracts include anti-assignment clauses to limit or prohibit assignment. Read on to discover the basics of assignment and anti-assignment clauses, what makes them unenforceable, and learn how to negotiate them.

What Is Assignment?

An assignment is like a transfer. If an agreement permits assignment, a party could assign — or transfer — its obligation to another party. The second party — the one to whom the contract was assigned — would then be required to provide the products or services.

Assignments don’t necessarily relieve liability for the party who transfers the agreement. Depending on the contract, the party who assigned its obligations may remain a guarantor of— or responsible for—the performance of the third party assigned the work. In other words, the party to the contract (the assignor) would be responsible for breaches committed by the party to which it assigned its performance (the assignee). To remove itself from the liability of the agreement, the assignor would need to seek a novation , which cancels the first contract and creates a new contract between the party that is the assignee and the original counterparty to the contract.

What is an Anti-Assignment Clause?

Anti-assignment clauses—also sometimes referred to as assignment clauses or non-assignment clauses—can appear in various forms. Essentially, they prevent one or both contracting parties from assigning some or all of their respective contractual obligations or rights to a third party.

Anti-Assignment Language to Look for in a Contract

When reading through your contract, you can typically find a separate paragraph entitled “Assignment,” “Non-assignment,” or “Anti-assignment.” Sometimes you’ll find the assignment language buried within a “Miscellaneous Provisions” section, which contains all the boilerplate language of a contract, such as severability and waiver provisions.

Contracts include two primary types of anti-assignment clauses. The first type categorically precludes all assignments of rights and duties. It usually reads something like this: “Neither Party may assign, delegate, or transfer this agreement or any of its rights or obligations under this agreement.”

The second type prohibits assignments unless the assigning party obtains the prior written consent of the other party. It usually reads something like this: “Neither this agreement nor any right, interest, or obligation herein may be assigned, transferred, or delegated to a third party without the prior written permission of the other party, and whose consent may be withheld for any reason.”

Some clauses may state that a change of control, such as a merger, consolidation, or acquisition, is considered an assignment. Read carefully , because you want to ensure that you won’t be in breach if you transfer the contract to an affiliate.

Additionally, check the termination section of your agreement. Some termination clauses may state that a non-assigning party may terminate the contract in the event of a non-permitted assignment. Or a termination clause may state that the agreement automatically terminates upon such a transfer.

Without an anti-assignment provision, contracts are generally assignable even absent the consent of the counterparty. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), a group of laws governing the sale of goods, prefers the free transferability of all types of property, including contracts.

Still, courts normally enforce anti-assignment clauses that are negotiated and agreed upon by both parties, depending on the applicable law, the jurisdiction governing the contract, and the language agreed upon in the contract. Be aware though that courts tend to narrowly interpret anti-assignment clauses. For instance, an anti-assignment clause may prohibit assignment but fail to state that an assignment in violation of the contract will be invalid. In this case, a party may be able to file a suit for breach of contract, but the court may not permit it to invalidate the assignment.

Even without a solid anti-assignment clause, there may still be an opportunity to prevent certain assignments. Courts may not enforce assignments to which the counterparty did not consent, even in the absence of a valid anti-assignment clause, especially if the contract is personal in nature. Some obligations can be performed equally well by a third party, such as a requirement to make payments. But a personal obligation involves a special relationship between parties or requires special levels of expertise, discretion, or reputation. For example, personal service contracts, including employment agreements, are personal enough in nature that they’re not transferable unless the non-transferring party consents.

In general, assignment is not enforceable when:

• The contract prohibits and voids assignment

As discussed above, contract provisions can prohibit and void an assignment.

• The assignment materially changes the contract

If the assignment would significantly impact the performance of the contract — for instance, if it greatly increases the risks or burden imposed on the other party — then a court would likely not enforce the assignment.

• The assignment violates the law

Certain laws prevent assignments. For example, some states legislate that an employee cannot assign its future wages to a third party.

• The assignment violates public policy

If the assignment would harm public policy interests, it will be void. For instance, victims may not assign their personal injury claims to third parties to discourage excessive litigation.

Negotiating Anti-Assignment Clauses

In certain situations, the inclusion of an anti-assignment clause may not be in a party’s best interests. If a party depends on a unique service provider or a specific person to perform, then it must make sure that that service provider or person can’t assign work to an unknown third party without its consent. For instance, if you pay a premium to hire a renowned jazz band to perform at your charity gala, you don’t want a local high school garage band to show up instead. In any situation involving unique services or providers, make sure you have the right to consent prior to any assignment under the agreement.

Another example of the importance of assignability is in mergers and acquisitions. When a company purchases another business, the acquired business’s existing customer base and supplier contracts make it more valuable . Consequently, if a party hopes to eventually sell its business, it would want the right to assign its existing contracts to the buyer. Otherwise, potential buyers may be scared off because of the time and money it will take to transfer the existing agreements. Plus, the existence of anti-assignment clauses may heavily impact the selling price. If it’s possible you may sell your business, ensure that you have the right to assign your contracts and that consent is not solely within the discretion of the counterparty.

If you want the right to assign the contract, but your agreement does not permit assignments, you’ll need to negotiate with your counterparty on this point. If the clause in your agreement prohibits all assignments, try to include a carve out by allowing assignment of your rights and obligations upon the prior written consent of the other party. Add that the counterparty shall not unreasonably withhold or delay consent. You may also want to carve out an exception to the anti-assignment clause by excluding assignments between affiliates or necessitated by change of control transactions, such as mergers or acquisitions.

Courts tend to construe anti-assignment and anti-delegation clauses narrowly. As mentioned, a number of courts have held that an anti-assignment clause does not remove the power of a party to assign the contract and invalidate the contract unless the provision explicitly states that such assignments will be invalid or void. Thus, if you want to make an assignment that violates your agreement, rather than creating an opportunity for a breach of contract case, explicitly state in your contract that such assignments are invalid or void.

If you don’t want the counterparty to be able to assign its rights or obligations, state your preference clearly in your agreement with one of these options.

• Require consent always

Include a clause such as, “Neither party may assign or delegate this agreement or its rights or obligations under this agreement without the prior written consent of the other party, and any assignment or delegation that violates this provision shall be void.”

• Don’t require consent for affiliates or successors

Include a clause such as, “Neither party may assign or delegate this agreement or its rights or obligations under this agreement without the prior written consent of the other party, except that no consent is required (a) for assignment to an entity in which the transferring party owns greater than 50 percent of the assets; or (b) in connection with any sale, transfer, or disposition of all or substantially all of its business or assets; provided that no such assignment will receive an assigning party of its obligations under this agreement. Any assignment or delegation that violates this provision shall be void.”

• Require consent to be given reasonably

Include a clause such as, “Neither party may assign or delegate this agreement or its rights or obligations under this agreement without the prior written consent of the other party, whose consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Any assignment or delegation that violates this provision shall be void.”

Note that you will not be able to prevent assignments resulting from court orders or by operation of law, such as those ordered through a bankruptcy hearing.

When you enter a contractual relationship, make sure to clearly determine your rights and obligations, as well as those of the other party. If it may be important for your business to have the right to assign all or parts of the contract, negotiate for the removal of the anti-assignment clause, or request changes to it to provide sufficient flexibility for you to assign.

Learn how to tackle Due Diligence projects more efficiently and free up your (and your associates’) time more effectively!

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more about what we do with these cookies in our privacy policy .

Don’t Confuse Change of Control and Assignment Terms

• David Tollen
• September 11, 2020

An assignment clause governs whether and when a party can transfer the contract to someone else. Often, it covers what happens in a change of control: whether a party can assign the contract to its buyer if it gets merged into a company or completely bought out. But that doesn’t make it a change of control clause. Change of control terms don’t address assignment. They say whether a party can terminate if the other party goes through a merger or other change of control. And they sometimes address other change of control consequences.

Don’t confuse the two. In a contract about software or other IT, you should think through the issues raised by each. (Also, don’t confuse assignment of contracts with assignment of IP .)

Here’s an assignment clause:

Assignment. Neither party may assign this Agreement or any of its rights or obligations hereunder without the other’s express written consent, except that either party may assign this Agreement to the surviving party in a merger of that party into another entity or in an acquisition of all or substantially all its assets. No assignment becomes effective unless and until the assignee agrees in writing to be bound by all the assigning party’s obligations in this Agreement. Except to the extent forbidden in this Section __, this Agreement will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties’ respective successors and assigns.

As you can see, that clause says no assignment is allowed, with one exception:

• Assignment to Surviving Entity in M&A: Under the clause above, a party can assign the contract to its buyer — the “surviving entity” — if it gets merged into another company or otherwise bought — in other words, if it ceases to exist through an M&A deal (or becomes an irrelevant shell company).

Consider the following additional issues for assignment clauses:

• Assignment to Affiliates: Can a party assign the contract to its sister companies, parents, and/or subs — a.k.a. its “Affiliates”?
• Assignment to Divested Entities: If a party spins off its key department or other business unit involved in the contract, can it assign the contract to that spun-off company — a.k.a. the “divested entity”? That’s particularly important in technology outsourcing deals and similar contracts. They often leave a customer department highly dependent on the provider’s services. If the customer can’t assign the contract to the divested entity, the spin-off won’t work; the new/divested company won’t be viable.
• Assignment to Competitors: If a party does get any assignment rights, can it assign to the other party’s competitors ? (If so, you’ve got to define “Competitor,” since the word alone can refer to almost any company.)
• All Assignments or None: The contract should usually say something about assignments. Otherwise, the law might allow all assignments. (Check your jurisdiction.) If so, your contracting partner could assign your agreement to someone totally unacceptable. (Most likely, though, your contracting partner would remain liable.) If none of the assignments suggested above fits, forbid all assignments.

Change of Control

Here’s a change of control clause:

Change of Control. If a party undergoes a Change of Control, the other party may terminate this Agreement on 30 days’ written notice. (“Change of Control” means a transaction or series of transactions by which more than 50% of the outstanding shares of the target company or beneficial ownership thereof are acquired within a 1-year period, other than by a person or entity that owned or had beneficial ownership of more than 50% of such outstanding shares before the close of such transactions(s).)

• Termination on Change of Control: A party can terminate if controlling ownership of the other party changes hands.

Change of control and assignment terms actually address opposite ownership changes. If an assignment clause addresses change of control, it says what happens if a party goes through an M&A deal and no longer exists (or becomes a shell company). A change of control clause, on the other hand, matters when the party subject to M&A does still exist . That party just has new owners (shareholders, etc.).

Consider the following additional issues for change of control clauses:

• Smaller Change of Ownership: The clause above defines “Change of Control” as any 50%-plus ownership shift. Does that set the bar too high? Should a 25% change authorize termination by the other party, or even less? In public companies and some private ones, new bosses can take control by acquiring far less than half the stock.
• No Right to Terminate: Should a change of control give any right to terminate, and if so, why? (Keep in mind, all that’s changed is the party’s owners — possibly irrelevant shareholders.)
• Divested Entity Rights: What if, again, a party spins off the department or business until involved in the deal? If that party can’t assign the contract to the divested entity, per the above, can it at least “sublicense” its rights to products or service, if it’s the customer? Or can it subcontract its performance obligations to the divested entity, if it’s the provider? Or maybe the contract should require that the other party sign an identical contract with the divested entity, at least for a short term.

Some of this text comes from the 3rd edition of The Tech Contracts Handbook , available to order (and review) from Amazon  here , or purchase directly from its publisher, the American Bar Association, here.

Want to do tech contracts better, faster, and with more confidence? Check out our training offerings here: https://www.techcontracts.com/training/ . Tech Contracts Academy has  options to fit every need and schedule: Comprehensive Tech Contracts M aster Classes™ (four on-line classes, two hours each), topical webinars (typically about an hour), customized in-house training (for just your team).   David Tollen is the founder of Tech Contracts Academy and our primary trainer. An attorney and also the founder of Sycamore Legal, P.C. , a boutique IT, IP, and privacy law firm in the San Francisco Bay Area, he also serves as an expert witness in litigation about software licenses, cloud computing agreements, and other IT contracts.

© 2020, 2022 by Tech Contracts Academy, LLC. All rights reserved.

Thank you to  Pixabay.com  for great, free stock images!

Related Posts

A contract should read like instructions for building furniture – or an aircraft carrier.

This week’s unsolicited advice on contracts … Here’s a proposition: we should NOT seek shorter or simpler contracts where those goals contradict our higher priority:

Consequential Damages in IT Contracts (CrowdStrike vs Delta Air Lines)

The very public argument between CrowdStrike and Delta Air Lines offers a window into a topic few understand: the exclusion of consequential damages in typical

Thoughts about our future jobs, from David Tollen

Watch this video for some encouraging (and non-typical) thoughts about our future jobs, from David Tollen. And if you’d like hone these very skills, our

New LIVE Trainings Coming in September

We invite you to join our live trainings this fall: Our Tech Contracts Master Class series runs Sept. 17, Sept. 24, Oct. 8, and Oct. 17, 2024. Four courses,

Our website uses cookies. If you click “Deny” or don’t respond, our system will ask your browser not to accept tracking or statistics-collecting cookies from our site, but not functional cookies. You may still receive script other technologies that Google Analytics or our other vendors use for anonymous tracking and statistics collection. For further information, please see our Cookie Policy per the link below.

More From Forbes

Assigning the non-assignable contract.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Kevin Amolsch is an investor and a hard money lender who has participated in over 2,000 transactions.  PineFinancialGroup.com .

They say wholesaling is the best way to become a real estate investor. “They” are often the gurus out there selling coaching and training seminars. So, are they right?

A real estate wholesaler is an investor who buys or controls properties at steep discounts and sells those properties to other real estate investors for a profit. Two advantages of becoming a wholesaler are it does not take cash or credit and there is very little risk when done correctly. This is why they advise newer investors to start here.

I cannot say whether they are right or wrong. Each investor needs to take their own path. However, what I will say is that I know a lot of wholesalers who have become extremely successful, and it is true that you don’t need cash or credit, so if those are your obstacles, wholesaling is worth considering. 

There are several ways to close on a wholesale deal once the wholesaler locates the deal and finds the buyer. The easiest of them all is to assign your contract for a fee. The way this works is you, as the wholesaler, would get a property under contract to buy with a motivated seller and then you simply assign your rights in that contract to someone else for a fee. So, if I have a contract on a house for $100,000 and have a buyer for $105,000, I can draft a contract assignment that spells out who the new buyer is and that there is an assignment fee of $5,000. They pay you the $5,000 and you sign the assignment. You are done. No getting a loan, no closing on the house, no rehab, no other problems. You take your $5,000, say thank you and move on to the next one. They send that assignment to the title company and close on the deal for $100,000.

Banks, however, tend not to view contracts assignments so favorably. As a seller of the property, the bank is looking for the highest possible price. If an investor can buy the property and resell it for a higher price, it indicates that the bank did not receive full value. It is also not uncommon for deals that have been assigned to fall apart. Most listing agents qualify the buyer by reviewing proof of funds, but when there is an assignment unknown to the seller, there is no way for the seller to vet the new buyer. During the credit crash in 2008, every bank I know of started prohibiting contract assignments. They would put a clause in their contracts stating the contract is not assignable, making it near impossible for an investor to mark up the property and resell it without closing. You can probably see how this created a problem for real estate wholesalers. 

Today’s NYT Mini Crossword Clues And Answers For Friday, August 16

Harris will propose $25,000 in down payment aid for first-time homebuyers as part of economic agenda, fc barcelona first team star misses training and is ‘close to exit’.

As a hard money lender, I frequently see a type of transaction that allows for the assigning of non-assignable contracts. Many investors now use this strategy to wholesale bank foreclosures without closing on the purchase. Although there are not many foreclosure properties available right now, this strategy will become more relevant as we see more banks start to foreclose again. 

The concept is the wholesaler puts the house under contract in the name of an entity, which is normally an LLC. Then they find their buyer, but instead of signing a contract assignment for a fee, they sign a transfer of the LLC for a fee. The owner of the LLC changes from the wholesaler to the buyer, and the buyer closes on the house in the name of the LLC they now own. When doing this, wholesalers need to be sure the company operating agreement, which they will put together, spells out that they can transfer ownership of the LLC and that any assets, including contracts, and obligations will stay with the LLC. 

To deploy this strategy, wholesalers need to set up an LLC for this one purpose. If the company has done any other business, a buyer will probably not take it. How the buyer finances the project is critical as well. Most conventional lenders will not loan to an LLC, so the buyer would need to use a creative business bank, a hard money lender, a private money lender or cash. Wholesalers should dig into how the buyer plans to finance it before the transaction so that everyone knows the deal will close. 

There are pros and cons to this strategy. The biggest pro, of course, is that it enables deals to get done! Having this strategy in the arsenal allows wholesalers to do deals other investors would not be able to. It also prevents them from being required to close on the transaction as the buyer. If forced to close on a contract, the wholesaler would incur closing fees, reducing profits. 

It is important to understand that this requires a legitimate entity in order to work. That means filing the correct documents with the state you are doing business in when required. A small fee is typically associated with filing documents, but it may be waived in certain circumstances so wholesalers should discuss these options with a competent real estate attorney. One final downside that could come up is the need to open a bank account. If any checks are paid to the entity itself, they will be hard to cash or deposit into your personal account or another business account. 

The information provided here is not investment, tax, or financial advice. You should consult with a licensed professional for advice concerning your specific situation.

Forbes Real Estate Council is an invitation-only community for executives in the real estate industry. Do I qualify?

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

• Deals Funded
• Deals in Process

Testimonials

An assignment clause (AC) is an important part of many contracts, especially for real estate. In this article we discuss:

• What is an Assignment Clause? (with Example)
• Anti-Assignment Clauses (with Example)
• Non-Assignment Clauses
• Important Considerations
• How Assets America ® Can Help

Frequently Asked Questions

What is an assignment clause.

An AC is part of a contract governing the sale of a property and other transactions. It deals with questions regarding the assignment of the property in the purchase agreement. The thrust of the assignment clause is that the buyer can rent, lease, repair, sell, or assign the property.

To “assign” simply means to hand off the benefits and obligations of a contract from one party to another. In short, it’s the transfer of contractual rights.

In-Depth Definition

Explicitly, an AC expresses the liabilities surrounding the assignment from the assignor to the assignee. The real estate contract assignment clause can take on two different forms, depending on the contract author:

• The AC states that the assignor makes no representations or warranties about the property or the agreement. This makes the assignment “AS IS.”
• The assignee won’t hold the assignor at fault. It protects the assignor from damages, liabilities, costs, claims, or other expenses stemming from the agreement.

The contract’s assignment clause states the “buyer and/or assigns.” In this clause, “assigns” is a noun that means assignees. It refers to anyone you choose to receive your property rights.

The assignment provision establishes the fact that the buyer (who is the assignor) can assign the property to an assignee. Upon assignment, the assignee becomes the new buyer.

The AC conveys to the assignee both the AC’s property rights and the AC’s contract obligations. After an assignment, the assignor is out of the picture.

What is a Lease Assignment?

Assignment Clause Example

This is an example of a real estate contract assignment clause :

“The Buyer reserves the right to assign this contract in whole or in part to any third party without further notice to the Seller; said assignment not to relieve the Buyer from his or her obligation to complete the terms and conditions of this contract should be assigning default.”

Apply For Financing

Assignment provision.

An assignment provision is a separate clause that states the assignee’s acceptance of the contract assignment.

Assignment Provision Example

Here is an example of an assignment provision :

“Investor, as Assignee, hereby accepts the above and foregoing Assignment of Contract dated XXXX, XX, 20XX by and between Assignor and ____________________ (seller) and agrees to assume all of the obligations and perform all of the duties of Assignor under the Contract.”

Anti-Assignment Clauses & Non-Assignment Clauses

An anti-assignment clause prevents either party from assigning a contract without the permission of the other party. It typically does so by prohibiting payment for the assignment. A non-assignment clause is another name for an anti-assignment clause.

Anti-Assignment Clause Example

This is an anti-assignment clause example from the AIA Standard Form of Agreement:

” The Party 1 and Party 2, respectively, bind themselves, their partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives to the other party to this Agreement and to the partners, successors, assigns, and legal representatives of such other party with respect to all covenants of this Agreement. Neither Party 1 nor Party 2 shall assign this Agreement without the written consent of the other.”

Important Considerations for Assignment Contracts

The presence of an AC triggers several important considerations.

Assignment Fee

In essence, the assignor is a broker that brings together a buyer and seller. As such, the assignor collects a fee for this service. Naturally, the assignor doesn’t incur the normal expenses of a buyer.

Rather, the new buyer assumes those expenses. In reality, the assignment fee replaces the fee the realtor or broker would charge in a normal transaction. Frequently, the assignment fee is less than a regular brokerage fee.

For example, compare a 2% assignment fee compared to a 6% brokerage fee. That’s a savings of $200,000 on a $5 million purchase price. Wholesalers are professionals who earn a living through assignments.

Frequently, the assignor will require that the assignee deposit the fee into escrow. Typically, the fee is not refundable, even if the assignee backs out of the deal after signing the assignment provision. In some cases, the assignee will fork over the fee directly to the assignor.

Assignor Intent

Just because the contract contains an AC does not obligate the buyer to assign the contract. The buyer remains the buyer unless it chooses to exercise the AC, at which point it becomes the assignor. It is up to the buyer to decide whether to go through with the purchase or assign the contract.

Nonetheless, the AC signals the seller of your possible intent to assign the purchase contract to someone else. For one thing, the seller might object if you try to assign the property without an AC.

You can have serious problems at closing if you show up with a surprise assignee. In fact, you could jeopardize the entire deal.

Another thing to consider is whether the buyer’s desire for an AC in the contract will frighten the seller. Perhaps the seller is very picky about the type of buyer to whom it will sell.

Or perhaps the seller has heard horror stories, real or fake, about assignments. Whatever the reason, the real estate contract assignment clause might put a possible deal in jeopardy.

Chain of Title

If you assign a property before the closing, you will not be in the chain of title. Obviously, this differs from the case in which you sell the property five minutes after buying it.

In the latter case, your name will appear in the chain of title twice, once as the buyer and again as the seller. In addition, the latter case would involve two sets of closing costs, whereas there would only one be for the assignment case. This includes back-to-back (or double) closings.

Enforceability

Assignment might not be enforceable in all situations, such as when:

• State law or public policy prohibits it.
• The contract prohibits it.
• The assignment significantly changes the expectations of the seller. Those expectations can include decreasing the value of the property or increasing the risk of default.

Also note that REO (real estate owned) properties, HUD properties, and listed properties usually don’t permit assignment contracts. An REO property is real estate owned by a bank after foreclosure. Typically, these require a 90-day period before a property can be resold.

How Assets America Can Help

The AC is a portion of a purchase agreement. When a purchase involves a commercial property requiring a loan of $10 million or greater, Assets America ® can arrange your financing.

We can finance wholesalers who decide to go through with a purchase. Alternatively, we can finance assignees as well. In either case, we offer expedient, professional financing and many supporting services. Contact us today for a confidential consultation.

What rights can you assign despite a contract clause expressly prohibiting assignment?

Normally, a prohibition against assignment does not curb the right to receive payments due. However, circumstances may cause the opposite outcome. Additionally, prohibition doesn’t prevent the right to money that the contract specifies is due.

What is the purpose of an assignment of rents clause in a deed of trust and who benefits?

The assignment of rents clause is a provision in a mortgage or deed of trust. It gives the lender the right to collect rents from mortgaged properties if the borrower defaults. All incomes and rents from a secured property flow to the lender and offset the outstanding debt. Clearly, this benefits the lender.

What is in assignment clause in a health insurance contract?

Commonly, health insurance policies contain assignment of benefits (AOB) clauses. These clauses allow the insurer to pay benefits directly to health care providers instead of the patient. In some cases, the provider has the patient sign an assignment agreement that accomplishes the same outcome. The provider submits the AOB agreement along with the insurance claim.

What does “assignment clause” mean for liability insurance?

The clause would allow the assignment of proceeds from a liability award payable to a third party. However, the insured must consent to the clause or else it isn’t binding. This restriction applies only before a loss. After a first party loss, the insurer’s consent no longer matters.

Related Articles

• Intercreditor Agreements – Everything You Need to Know
• Alienation Clause – Everything You Need to Know
• Loan Defeasance – Everything You Need to Know
• Cross Default – Complete Guide

Other Resources

• Adjustable Rate Mortgage
• Aircraft Financing Terms & Loan – Complete Guide
• Alienation Clause – Everything You Need to Know
• ARM Components
• ARV – After Repair Value – Everything You Need to Know
• Assignment Clause – Everything You Need to Know
• Average Daily Rate (ADR) Formula – Complete Guide
• Balloon Mortgages
• Blanket Mortgage
• Cap Rate Simplified for Commercial Real Estate (+ Calculator)
• Cash Coverage Ratio | Complete Guide + Calculator
• Cash Out Refinance on Investment Property – Complete Guide
• Closing Costs
• CMBS Loans: Guide to Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities
• Commercial Adjustable Rate Loan Indexes
• Commercial Real Estate Appraisals – Everything You Need to Know
• Commercial Real Estate Syndication – Ultimate Success Guide
• Contingency Reserve – Everything You Need to Know
• CRE Loans – What Nobody Tells You About Commercial Lending
• Cross Default – Everything You Need to Know
• Debt Service Coverage Ratio
• Debt vs Equity Financing
• DIP Financing
• EBITDA Margin – Ultimate Guide
• Effective Gross Income (+ Calculator)
• Equity Kicker – Everything You Need to Know
• Fixed Rate Loans
• Full Service Gross Lease – Everything You Need to Know
• Gap Funding Commercial Real Estate – Pros & Cons
• Ground Lease – Everything You Need to Know (+ Calculator)
• Guide to Floor Area Ratio, Floor Space Index & Plot Ratio
• Hard Costs vs Soft Costs – Commercial Real Estate Guide
• Hard Money vs Soft Money Loans in Real Estate
• How Much to Borrow
• Hypothecation Agreements – Everything You Need to Know
• Industrial Gross Lease
• Intercreditor Agreements – Everything You Need to Know
• Interest Only Mortgage
• Lines of Business
• Loan Defeasance
• Loan Proceeds – Everything You Need To Know
• Loan to Cost Ratio
• Loss to Lease – Everything You Need to Know
• Market Links
• Master Lease Agreements
• Master Planned Communities
• Mergers & Acquisitions Seller Intake Questionnaire
• Mergers & Acquisitions Buyer Intake Questionnaire
• Mini Perm Loan – Complete Guide
• MIRR Guide | Modified Internal Rate of Return (+ Calculator)
• Modified Gross Lease – Everything You Need to Know
• Mortgage Programs
• Net Effective Rent (+ Calculator)
• Net Income and NOI
• Net Leases (Single, Double, Triple)
• Operating Expense Ratio – Ultimate Guide (+ Calculator)
• Pari Passu – Everything You Need to Know
• Partially Amortized Loan – Complete Guide
• Potential Gross Income – Everything You Need to Know
• Preferred Equity in Real Estate – Complete Investor’s Guide
• Preferred Shares – Everything You Need to Know
• Property Interest – Everything You Need to Know
• Recourse Loans – Complete Guide
• Restrictive Covenants – Everything You Need to Know
• Reverse 1031 Exchange – Everything You Need to Know

Ronny was a pleasure to work with and is extremely knowledgeable. His hard work was never ending until the job was done. They handled a complex lease and guided us through entire process, including the paperwork. Not to mention a below market lease rate and more than all the features we needed in a site. We later used Assets America for a unique equipment financing deal where once again Ronny and team exceeded our expectations and our timeline. Thank you to Assets America for your highly professional service!

Great experience with Assets America. Fast turn around. Had a lender in place in 30 minutes looking to do the deal. Totally amazing. Highly recommend them to anyone looking for financing. Ronny is fantastic. Give them a call if the deal makes sense they can get it funded. Referring all our clients.

Assets America guided us every step of the way in finding and leasing our large industrial building with attached offices. They handled all of the complex lease negotiations and contractual paperwork. Ultimately, we received exactly the space we needed along with a lower than market per square foot pricing, lease length and end of term options we requested. In addition to the real estate lease, Assets America utilized their decades-long financial expertise to negotiate fantastic rates and terms on our large and very unique multimillion dollar equipment purchase/lease. We were thankful for how promptly and consistently they kept us informed and up to date on each step of our journey. They were always available to answer each and every one of our questions. Overall, they provided my team with a fantastic and highly professional service!

Assets America was responsible for arranging financing for two of my multi million dollar commercial projects. At the time of financing, it was extremely difficult to obtain bank financing for commercial real estate. Not only was Assets America successful, they were able to obtain an interest rate lower than going rates. The company is very capable, I would recommend Assets America to any company requiring commercial financing.

Assets America was incredibly helpful and professional in assisting us in purchasing our property. It was great to have such knowledgeable and super-experienced, licensed pros in our corner, pros upon which we could fully rely. They helped and successfully guided us to beat out 9 other competing offers! They were excellent at communicating with us at all times and they were extremely responsive. Having them on our team meant that we could always receive truthful, timely and accurate answers to our questions. We would most definitely utilize their services again and again for all of our real estate needs.

Assets America is a great company to work with. No hassles. Recommend them to everyone. Professional, fast response time and definitely gets the job done.

Ronny at Assets America has been invaluable to us and definitely is tops in his field. Great experience. Would refer them to all our business associates.

We were very pleased with Assets America’s expertise and prompt response to our inquiry. They were very straight forward with us and helped a great deal. We referred them to all our business associates.

I’ve worked with this company for decades. They are reputable, knowledgeable, and ethical with proven results. I highly recommend them to anyone needing commercial financing.

Ronny was incredibly adept and responsive – top-notch professional who arranged impressive term sheets.

Assets America helped us survive a very difficult time and we most definitely give them 5 stars!

Ronny was very friendly and though we were unable to make something happen at the moment he gave me some direction to go.

My business partner and I were looking to purchase a retail shopping center in southern California.  We sought out the services of Ronny, CFO of Assets America.  Ronny found us several commercial properties which met our desired needs.  We chose the property we liked best, and Ronny went to work. He negotiated very aggressively on our behalf. We came to terms with the Seller, entered into a purchase agreement and opened escrow.  Additionally, we needed 80 percent financing on our multimillion-dollar purchase.  Assets America also handled the commercial loan for us.  They were our One-Stop-Shop. They obtained fantastic, low, fixed rate insurance money for us.  So, Assets America handled both the sale and the loan for us and successfully closed our escrow within the time frame stated in the purchase agreement.  Ronny did and performed exactly as he said he would. Ronny and his company are true professionals.  In this day and age, it’s especially rare and wonderful to work with a person who actually does what he says he will do.  We recommend them to anyone needing any type of commercial real estate transaction and we further highly recommend them for any type of commercial financing.  They were diligent and forthright on both accounts and brought our deal to a successful closing.

Questionnaire

• Job Postings

Dental Specialists

• General Practice Dentists
• The Dental Team
• Find a Dentist
• Reduced Cost Clinics
• Understanding Your Dental Plan
• Government Dental Plans & Programs
• Mobile Dentistry Providers

Just like your family doctor, your dentist may work with dental specialists to provide you with the best care possible.

• Babies and Toddlers
• Use of Sedation
• Healthy Habits
• Oral Health Month
• Childhood Dental Disease

First Dental Visit

Prevent problems early. Your child's first dental visit should occur by age one or within six months of when you see the first tooth.

• Maintaining Your Oral Health
• Women's Oral Health
• General Health

Pregnancy and Oral Health

Dental care during pregnancy is not only safe, regular dental visits support your health and your baby's.

• The Dental Exam
• Daily Dental Care
• Mouthguards
• Water Fluoridation
• Stress and Oral Health
• Smoking & Vaping
• Binge Drinking

Simple Steps

Most dental disease is preventable—starting with these five steps to take at home.

• Tooth Decay
• Gum Disease
• Teeth Grinding (Bruxism)
• Oral Cancer
• Tooth Sensitivity

Suffering from headaches?

Clenching or grinding your teeth (often at night) may be the reason and can also cause damage to your teeth and jaw.

• Restorative Dentistry
• Dental Emergencies
• Antibiotics
• Sedation & General Anesthesia
• Orthodontics
• Dental Care Outside of Canada

Replace Missing Teeth

Your dentist may recommend a number of treatment options to replace missing teeth, such as a denture.

• Cost of Dentistry
• Suggested Fee Guide
• Dental Plans FAQ
• Oral Health Handouts

Frequently Asked Questions

A series of common questions on dental care and treatment.

• Your Dental Health
• Assignment & Non-Assignment

Dental Plans: Assignment/Non-Assignment

What is assignment and non-assignment of benefits.

As a service to patients, a dental office may accept assignment of benefits whereby they agree to have the patient request that his or her dental plan provider pay the dental office directly for the percentage of the cost covered. The patient is responsible for paying the co-payment when treatment is provided. See also: What is the dental plan co-payment? In a non-assignment office, the patient is responsible for paying the full cost of treatment at the time it is provided. The dental office will assist the patient by providing a completed dental claim form that the patient can submit to their dental plan provider for reimbursement. In some cases, a dental plan company will only reimburse the plan holder requiring the patient to pay for all costs at the time treatment is provided. In all circumstances, the patient is responsible for any costs not covered by his or her dental plan.

Why do I have to pay for treatment when it's covered by my plan?

Dental offices are entitled to reimbursement for services at the time treatment is provided. A dental plan is a contract between a patient and/or their dental plan carrier. As a service to patients, some offices will accept assignment of benefits whereby they agree to accept payment for the covered portion of treatment directly from the dental plan provider. Dental offices are not obligated to do so, and in some cases, are restricted from doing so as the dental plan carrier will only reimburse the patient. The details of a patient’s plan are protected by the Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA). Due to the restrictions of a dental office in knowing what is covered by their patients' plans, they may choose to have the patient pay them directly for all services. While the dental office will help with the claim, it is the patient's responsibility to know what is covered in their plan including any limits to the plan or changes; to pay for any costs not covered by the plan; and to seek reimbursement from their dental plan provider.

Why has my dental office asked for a deposit for treatment?

The dental office may incur various expenses in preparation for the commencement of your dental treatment. It is not uncommon for dental offices to request a deposit prior to treatment.

• General Questions
• Pre-determination
• The Canadian Dental Care Plan/Canada Dental Benefit
• Sedation & General Anesthesia

Get the Reddit app

Are you a Federal Employee or contractor? This subreddit is for sharing news and information regarding the inner workings of the US Federal Government for Federal Employees. Fed news Government news Federal employment Federal employee Government employee This subreddit is not affiliated, sponsored, or in any way supported by the US Federal Government.

What does “non-reimbursable assignment”? There’s a couple of jobs I’d like to apply to however they all have that statement with varying years…

By continuing, you agree to our User Agreement and acknowledge that you understand the Privacy Policy .

Enter the 6-digit code from your authenticator app

You’ve set up two-factor authentication for this account.

Enter a 6-digit backup code

Create your username and password.

Reddit is anonymous, so your username is what you’ll go by here. Choose wisely—because once you get a name, you can’t change it.

Reset your password

Enter your email address or username and we’ll send you a link to reset your password

Check your inbox

An email with a link to reset your password was sent to the email address associated with your account

Choose a Reddit account to continue