plc assignment and novation

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.

Family Limited Partnership (FLP) for International Estate Planning

Family Limited Partnerships (FLPs) offer a strategic approach for families

How to Use Life Insurance for International Estate Planning: A Comprehensive Guide

Life insurance stands as an important tool for estate planning,

Choosing the Right Vehicle for International Estate Planning: A Guide to International Estate Planning Tools

When planning how to manage and pass on your estate,

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

How can we help?

• 13 March 2018
• Commercial Real Estate

Novation and Assignment: Sisters, Not Twins

There’s often, understandably, a bit of uncertainty about whether (and how) a party to a contract can “assign” (transfer) its rights, or pass on its obligations, under that contract, to another person.

In law, the general rule is that only the original parties to the contract can discharge or fulfil the obligations and enforce the rights created under it and nobody else gets a look in. This is called “privity of contract”.

Essentially, novation and assignment are both mechanisms to get around this restriction. However, while the end result is the same, there are some important differences between these two mechanisms.

Under an assignment, one party (the assignor) keeps performing their obligations under the contract, but transfers some or all rights to a third party (the assignee). The parties to the contract remain the same so privity of contract is preserved.

Assignments can be legal or equitable. In order for an assignment to be a legal assignment, the assignment must be agreed in writing, signed by the assignor, and the other party to the contract must be given notice of the assignment. A legal assignment is usually preferable as this allows the assignee to enforce the rights in their own name directly.

If the assignment is an equitable assignment because it does not fit the criteria for a legal assignment (for example, the other party was not given notice of it), the assignee will need to get the assignor to enforce the assigned rights on its behalf.

Contracts often require the consent of the other party before any assignment can take place. Some contracts expressly prohibit assignment. However, even where there is such wording in the contract, there is nothing stopping you from asking the party to consent to the assignment anyway, though you should take care to record any agreement in writing.

The main point to remember is that you cannot assign obligations under a contract to another party – you can only assign your benefits or rights. Even if the assignee agrees that they will take on the obligations under the contract, it is still the assignor who remains responsible for performance of the obligations and liable if they are not. In practice, what often happens is that the assignee does take over the performance of the contractual obligations but simply agrees to indemnify the assignor for any failures in performance.

It is also important to note that some rights may not be legally capable of assignment.

Stephen James

View profile

Email Stephen

+44 118 960 4674

When you novate a contract, the original contract effectively ceases to exist and is replaced with a new contract. The new contract contains exactly the same rights and obligations as the original contract, except that it substitutes one of the original parties (the outgoing party) with a third party (the incoming party).

As you are creating a new contract, technically you need to provide fresh consideration. Usually a simple novation agreement between all the parties will be enough, but, if there is any doubt, the parties may choose to execute the novation as a deed instead, which dispenses with the need for consideration.

The novation agreement (or deed) will specify what happens to the liabilities under the original contract. In a typical novation, the outgoing party would be released from all liabilities and the incoming party would inherit these. However, this is up to the parties to decide; they could even decide that the outgoing party will remain liable for all of the liabilities under the original contract.

Novating the contract will release the outgoing party from any future obligations which may arise. This is a crucial difference between novation and assignment.

Although the novation agreement itself can be simple, the process of getting all the parties to the table to agree and execute might be more complex. The main issue for an outgoing party will be persuading the other original party to sign. The other original party often has concerns about service continuity and may want certain assurances or information about the incoming third party.

Equally, the other original party is not obliged to agree: they can refuse to novate and then sue for breach if the party trying to exit the contract fails to meet its contractual obligations. As they still have this other option, in any novation scenario, the outgoing party is probably in a weaker bargaining position, and the other original party may well use this to their advantage.

About this article

• Subject Novation and Assignment: Sisters, Not Twins
• Author Stephen James
• Expertise Commercial Real Estate
• Published 13 March 2018

Disclaimer This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full General Notices on our website.

Read, listen and watch our latest insights

• 17 April 2024
• Immigration

Shaping Britain’s Future: updates to Skilled Worker and Family visas

In December 2023, the UK government, under Home Secretary James Cleverly, announced a five-point plan aimed at reducing net migration, with significant revisions to visa regulations.

‘Injured feelings’- Vento Bands

Injuring someone’s feelings through acts of discrimination, harassment or victimisation can be a costly business.

FAQs on the long awaited amendments to Statutory Paternity Leave

This April has seen a wave of new family friendly rights come into force. Amongst these, is the long awaited amendments to Statutory Paternity Leave.

• 10 April 2024

New Guidance: Confidence to Recruit

The new Government guide in collaboration with the CIPD aims to give employers the confidence to recruit its workforce from a wider range of people including those who may have been overlooked in the past as a problem rather than an asset.

• 03 April 2024

FAQ’s on the new Carer’s Leave Act

Beginning on 6 April 2024, the Carer’s Leave Act comes into force, meaning carers are now entitled to request 1 week’s unpaid leave to care for their dependants.

• 02 April 2024
• Construction

UK housebuilders investigated over suspected exchanges of anti-competitive information

In 2022 the CMA was called upon by the Secretary of State for the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities to conduct a study into the housebuilding sector and provide recommendations on how the sector can operate as efficiently as possible

Assignment and Assumption Agreement with Optional Novation

Practical law canada standard document 2-592-7206  (approx. 31 pages), get full access to this document with practical law.

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

• Increase efficiency
• Enhance productivity
• Improve response time
• General Contract and Boilerplate
• Canada (Common Law)

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

Understanding your business’ new employment law obligations, 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

UK: 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 .

This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to www.law-now.com/law-now/mondaq

Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.

The original publication date for this article was 07/06/2010.

  © Mondaq® Ltd 1994 - 2024. All Rights Reserved .

Login to Mondaq.com

Password Passwords are Case Sensitive

Forgot your password?

Why Register with Mondaq

Free, unlimited access to more than half a million articles (one-article limit removed) from the diverse perspectives of 5,000 leading law, accountancy and advisory firms

Articles tailored to your interests and optional alerts about important changes

Receive priority invitations to relevant webinars and events

You’ll only need to do it once, and readership information is just for authors and is never sold to third parties.

Your Organisation

We need this to enable us to match you with other users from the same organisation. It is also part of the information that we share to our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

• Select location
• United Kingdom
• United States
• Southampton
• Charlottesville
• Los Angeles
• San Francisco
• Silicon Valley
• Research Triangle Park
• Washington, D.C.
• Winston-Salem

• Energy & Natural Resources
• Financial Institutions
• Life Sciences & Pharmaceuticals
• Manufacturing
• Private Wealth
• Public, Government Services & Third Sector
• Real Estate
• Retail & Hospitality
• Digital: IT & Privacy
• Dispute Resolution & Litigation
• Employment & Pensions
• Finance: Banking, Restructuring, Insolvency
• Intellectual Property
• Projects, Construction & Infrastructure
• Alternative Business & Legal Solutions
• Timelines and Processes

New PE backing for specialist technical distributor

Womble bond dickinson announces key appointment strengthening residential expertise, energy transition in the spotlight as womble bond dickinson hosts the transatlantic lawyer network programme, deep dive into fca enforcement proposals, wbd advises on planning consent for major upgrade of yorkshire's high-voltage network, the latest ppn updates in procurement law, a raft of changes to the uk immigration system – key things for you to know.

09 May 2024 10 AM - 11 AM BST (UTC+1)

Unlocking opportunities: tech in Bristol and Bath

16 May 2024 3:30 PM - 6 PM BST (UTC+1)

It's all change for charity leaders and trustees

22 May 2024 12 PM - 2 PM BST (UTC+1)

Casting light on novation and assignment

Contributors.

Simon Lewis

Anyone working in the construction sector is likely to have encountered the terms "assignment" and "novation". An assignment is a transfer of an interest from one party to another. So, for example, if A enters into a contract with B, A may generally assign the benefit (but not the burden) of that contract to C. In this context, "benefit" and "burden" refer to the two aspects of any contractual relationship. If I offer to build a house for you for £500,000, the benefit of the contract to me is to receive the money. The burden is building the house. For you, the benefit of the contract is receiving the house and the burden is paying me the money. That is perhaps a slightly over simplistic example but gives the general idea. The other thing to note is that the benefit usually includes both accrued and future contractual rights. It is possible to assign only future or only accrued rights, but clear words are needed to do so.

Novation is also the transfer of an interest from one party to another. Unlike assignment, however, novation transfers both the benefit and the burden of a contract. For that reason novation requires the consent of all the parties whereas in the example I have given above an assignment can be carried out without B's consent. Again in simplistic terms, novation operates to swap one contract between A and B with another contract between A and C.

Although these mechanisms are commonly used in construction contracts, they are relatively rarely considered by the Courts in detail, which makes the recent decision in Energy Works (Hull) Limited v MW High Tech Projects UK Limited and Others [2020] EWHC 2537 (TCC) so interesting. In this case, the employer, Energy Works (EWHL) had entered into a contract with MW High Tech (MW) to design, procure, construct, commission and test a power plant. The contract was in the form of the IChemE Red Book, as amended. MW then entered into a subcontract with Outotec (USA) Inc (Outotec) to supply certain elements of the plant and used the IChemE Yellow Book subcontract form. Outotec also provided a collateral warranty to EWHL which entitled EWHL to step into the subcontract if the main contract was terminated. In addition, both the main contract and the subcontract entitled EWHL to require that the Outotec subcontract was assigned to it if the main contract was terminated. Both the main contract and the subcontract simply required MW to "assign the subcontract" and did not expressly refer to assigning the benefit of the subcontract or whether this included accrued and future rights.

For reasons we do not need to go into here, the project ran into difficulty and EWHL terminated the main contract. EWHL considered stepping into the subcontract but did not. MW did however assign the subcontract to EWHL. 

EWHL commenced proceedings against MW claiming damages for losses arising out of the termination and defects in the works. MW added Outotec as a Part 20 Defendant alleging that the losses claimed by EWHL arose from Outotec's breach of the subcontract.

The court was asked to look at a number of preliminary issues one of which was the question of whether EWHL retained the benefit of accrued rights against Outotec or, if not, whether the assignment transferred both the benefit and the burden of the subcontract or alternatively took effect as a novation. This gave the court the opportunity to review the principles around assignment and novation in some detail and it is well worth a look at the judgment as a very thorough and illuminating review of the principles in this area. On the facts, the judge reached the conclusion that MW's accrued and future rights had been assigned to EWHL. In the circumstances, there had therefore been no novation. 

Whilst the judgment applies well established principles in relation to assignment and novation, the implications are worth considering in the context of the sort of complex contractual arrangements that the parties entered into here, which are by no means unusual. There is no doubt that MW did not anticipate that the net effect of the assignment would strip MW of any recourse it had against Outotec, effectively preventing MW from recovering from Outotec the losses which Outotec may well have been responsible for in the first place. It is difficult to see how this could be avoided in the future. Employers commonly insist upon as many routes to recovery as possible in the event that things do not go according to plan. Consequently, suggesting, for example, that assignment be limited to future rights only or restricted in some other way so as to offer the contractor some protection may not be attractive to employers and their funders. In addition, EWHL was unable to agree step-in arrangements with Outotec, demonstrating precisely why such alternative routes to recovery are necessary. This case may well therefore be simply an object lesson in the law of unintended consequences rather than a warning to adopt a different strategy in such complex contractual arrangements in the future.

First published on  Building, 26 October 2020

Projects, Construction and Infrastructure

Construction and engineering, womble bond dickinson insights.

Sign up to receive the latest news, events and e-alerts

Recommended

Empowering consumers for the green transition directive – what will this new legislation mean for your business, pieces of the jigsaw – dwp consults on options for defined benefit schemes, what is the circular economy action plan and why does it matter to businesses outside the eu, customs declarations mistakes are costing uk businesses thousands – is it time to re-evaluate processes, competence, the principal designer and the new building safety regime, what role will esg play on the energy transition stage, seeking individuals as investors regulatory conditions change again, caveats: the early warning system in scotland, heat network zoning is coming to england – what do you need to know, why construction must support neurodiversity – through the legal lens.

You are switching to the United States

This selection will switch the website from presenting information primarily about the United Kingdom to information about the United States . If you would like to switch back, you may use location selection options at the top of the page.

Although we would like to hear from you, we cannot represent you until we know that doing so will not create a conflict of interest. Also, we cannot treat unsolicited information as confidential. Accordingly, please do not send us any information about any legal matter until we authorize you to do so. To initiate a possible representation, please call one of our lawyers or staff members.

By clicking the “ACCEPT” button, you agree that we may review any information you transmit to us. You recognize that, even if you submit information that you consider confidential in an effort to retain us, our review of that information will not create an obligation on us to keep it confidential and will not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could and will be used against you.

Please click the “ACCEPT” button if you understand and accept the foregoing statement and wish to proceed.

Are loans normally assigned or novated? Does it matter?

Both assignments and novations of loan contracts are common. As they have different effects, limitations and risks, whichever mechanism is suitable depends on the purpose and requirements of the transaction. The fundamental difference is that assignment allows the transfer of rights (but not obligations) from one party to another without the consent of the borrower, whereas novation is the extinction and replacement of rights and obligations under a contract with a new agreement and with different parties. It does therefore require the agreement of the borrower.

A detailed discussion of assignment is beyond the scope of this note. However, for the purposes of contrasting assignment and novation, the following are the key points.

Types of assignment

There are two types of assignment: (i) legal assignment under s. 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925 ( LPA ), which imposes formal requirements; and (ii) equitable assignment which is not subject to these requirements.

What rights may be assigned?

The general rule is that a presently owned right (eg

Access this content for free with a 7 day trial of LexisNexis and benefit from:

• Instant clarification on points of law
• Smart search
• Workflow tools
• 41 practice areas

** Trials are provided to all LexisNexis content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisNexis services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK, Ireland and selected UK overseas territories and Caribbean countries. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.

Get your quote today and take step closer to being able to benefit from:

• 36 practice areas

Get a LexisNexis quote

* denotes a required field

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in CONTINUE READING GET A QUOTE

Albert is a barrister at 4 Stone Buildings practising mainly in the fields of commercial law, banking and financial services law, company and insolvency law and civil fraud. Albert's work often has an international or cross-border element, and his experience includes advising in relation to matters arising in offshore financial centres. Albert's financial services experience includes disputes over: complex structured financial products; capital markets transactions; FX and CFD trading; and the mis-selling of financial products.

Albert was recently seconded to the FCA where he advised on a range of regulated activities, including electronic peer-to-peer lending platforms and collective investment schemes. He is currently a consultant barrister with the National Crime Agency, where he deals with civil asset recovery matters under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

Related legal acts:

• Law of Property Act 1925 (1925 c 20)

Key definition:

Loan definition, what does loan mean.

An advance of funds from one party (the creditor ) to another party (the debtor ) for a period of time. The funds can be advanced for an agreed period or be repayable upon demand. Interest is usually paid on the advance which can be secured or unsecured

Popular documents

I've just noticed that an executed document has the wrong date on it. what should i do.

I've just noticed that an executed document has the wrong date on it. What should I do?The first thing you need to do is insert the correct date in the document which has been incorrectly dated. It is important that the date on the document accurately reflects the date on which the parties to it

Types of borrowers

Types of borrowersEconomic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023—reform of limited partnerships: The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 (ECCTA 2023) received Royal Assent on 26 October 2023. Its provisions will come into force over an extended period of time. For more

Negative pledges

Negative pledgesThis Practice Note examines:•why negative pledge clauses are used in commercial transactions •the consequences of breaching negative pledge provisions•how negative pledges are viewed in the context of security and quasi-security, and•key considerations when drafting a negative pledge

Overdrafts, term loans and revolving credit facilities

Overdrafts, term loans and revolving credit facilitiesThis Practice Note explains the features of three common types of loan facility:•overdrafts•term loans, and•revolving credit facilities (RCFs)It also considers the advantages and disadvantages of each type of loan facility from a borrower's

0330 161 1234

• International Sales(Includes Middle East)
• Latin America and the Caribbean
• Netherlands
• New Zealand
• Philippines
• South Africa
• Switzerland
• United States

Popular Links

• Supplier Payment Terms
• Partner Alliance Programme

HELP & SUPPORT

• Legal Help and Support
• Tolley Tax Help and Support

LEGAL SOLUTIONS

• Compliance and Risk
• Forms and Documents
• Legal Drafting
• Legal Research
• Magazines and Journals
• News and Media Analysis
• Practice Management
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Settings
• Terms & Conditions
• Data Protection Inquiry
• Protecting Human Rights: Our Modern Slavery Agreement

What Is the Difference Between Assignment and Novation?

By Jordan Bramis Lawyer

Updated on November 22, 2023 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 .

Assignments

Other differences between an assignment and novation, choosing between assignment and novation, key takeaways.

To further your commercial endeavours, you may wish to transfer your rights under a contract to another party. The primary legal mechanisms for transferring the rights or obligations under a contract to a third party are assignment, which involves transferring benefits or rights and novation, which facilitates the transfer of both rights/benefits and obligations. It is crucial to understand that these concepts are different. Unfortunately, many people tend to confuse the two, leading to unwanted consequences in relation to legal contracts. This article will explore the key differences between the two.

Under a contract, where a party (the original party to the contract) is initiating an ‘assignment’ , they are transferring some or all of their contractual rights to a third party, known as the “assignor”. The recipient of those contractual rights is known as the “assignee”. For instance, a party can transfer the right to receive payment or benefits under the contract through an assignment.

Following an assignment, the assignee gains the right to the benefits of the contract that the assignor has assigned. Furthermore, they gain the authority to initiate legal proceedings, either individually or in conjunction with the assignor. It is important to note, however, that the assignee does not become a contracting party to the original agreement. Under assignment, contractual burdens and liabilities cannot be transferred. Therefore, the assignor retains responsibility for fulfilling any remaining contractual obligations that still need to be discharged.

In most cases, assignment necessitates the consent of the obligor (the party obligated to fulfil the contract). The obligor needs to agree to the assignee taking over the rights held by the assignor. Additionally, the assignor must provide notice to the obligor about the assignment. This notice serves to inform the obligor that they should now deal with the assignee regarding the assigned rights.

By comparison, a novation agreement achieves the transfer of both rights and obligations to a third party. Here, the new party (the “novatee”) steps into the shoes of the original party (the “novator”) and assumes both the rights and obligations. 

A novation agreement essentially terminates the contract with the original party and creates a new contract with the new party. A novation agreement means you can substitute one party for another without changing the obligations agreed to in the original contract. 

Novation most often arises in big corporate takeovers or on the sale of a business. On takeover, deeds of novation are used to transfer contracts from the seller to the buyer and allow the buyer to carry on the seller’s business.

All involved parties, including the remaining contractual party, the novator, and the novatee, must unanimously agree to the novation. It is a collective decision to replace the old contract with a new one.

Novation creates an entirely new legal relationship. The old contract is set aside, and the new contract, which includes the novatee, comes into effect. Following novation, the novator is released from all obligations and liabilities associated with the original contract.

The choice between assignment and novation depends on various factors.

If a party wishes to maintain some level of involvement and responsibility in the original contract, assignment is often the better choice. It enables the transfer of specific rights while retaining some obligations. For a complete break from the original contract, where a party wishes to shed all obligations and liabilities, novation may be preferential.

One of the most important and sometimes overlooked steps is to document what you have agreed to in writing. Have your agreement written up, signed and stored safely. The area where most disputes and disagreements arise is where parties have not written down what they agree to. This results in a conflict that could have been easily avoided.

When you are ready to sell your business and begin the next chapter, it is important to understand the moving parts that will impact a successful sale.

This How to Sell Your Business Guide covers all the essential topics you need to know about selling your business.

If you intend to assign your rights under a contract to a third party, you can do so through an assignment or a novation. However, be aware that these differ. An assignment gives some rights to a third party, whereas a novation transfers both rights and obligations to a third party. Ensure that whichever method you choose, you document this in a written agreement.

If you need further assistance with an assignment or novation, our experienced contract lawyers can assist you 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 1300 544 755 or visit our membership page .

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

Register for our free webinars

Ai in business: mastering compliance and mitigating risks, preventing sexual and gender-based harassment: your whs legal duties, protecting your retail business: understanding your legal obligations, demystifying startup funding: strategies for growth, contact us now.

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

Related articles

What Is a Deed of Novation and How Does It Affect My Business?

You’re entering into a deed of novation – what to consider?

What is the Difference Between an Agreement and a Deed?

How do I negotiate a sale of business agreement?

We’re an award-winning law firm

2023 Fast Firms - Australasian Lawyer

2022 Law Firm of the Year - Australasian Law Awards

2021 Law Firm of the Year - Australasian Law Awards

2020 Excellence in Technology & Innovation Finalist - Australasian Law Awards

2020 Employer of Choice Winner - Australasian Lawyer

Assignment and Novation: Spot the Difference 12 November 2020

• Contribution
• EPC Contract
• Power Plant

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

Related stories

Commercial disputes weekly – issue 202, enabling energy transition in the transport sector – new funding opportunities for port operators and shipowners, the future of ev charging: spotlight on france, follow us on.

• X (Twitter)

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.

• Practical Law

Deed of novation of contract

Practical law uk standard document 7-381-3101  (approx. 13 pages).

• General Contract and Boilerplate