what is the difference between assignment and novation

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 September 19, 2022

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

Assignment and Novation: Spot the Difference 12 November 2020

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key contacts

Rebecca Williams

Partner London

Mark McAllister-Jones

Counsel London

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[1] [2020] EWHC 2537 (TCC)

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

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

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

DOWNLOAD PDF

• Transfer of rights
• Contribution
• EPC Contract
• Power Plant

Related insights

Wfw advises elovade on acquisition of inuit ab, better late than never: what happens if the seller of a ship fails to deliver it to the buyer by the agreed deadline, wfw advises sgi on successful appeal for 9% registration tax on easements on agricultural land, follow us on.

• X (Twitter)

Assignment vs. Novation

What's the difference.

Assignment and novation are both legal concepts that involve the transfer of rights and obligations from one party to another. However, there are some key differences between the two. Assignment refers to the transfer of a single party's rights under a contract to another party, while the original party still remains liable for the performance of the contract. On the other hand, novation involves the substitution of one party with another, where the original party is completely released from their obligations and the new party assumes all rights and liabilities. In essence, assignment is a transfer of rights, whereas novation is a transfer of both rights and obligations.

Further Detail

Introduction.

When it comes to legal agreements and contracts, there are various mechanisms that can be used to transfer rights and obligations from one party to another. Two commonly used mechanisms are assignment and novation. While both assignment and novation involve the transfer of rights and obligations, they differ in their legal implications and the extent of the transfer. In this article, we will explore the attributes of assignment and novation, highlighting their similarities and differences.

Assignment refers to the transfer of rights and obligations from one party (the assignor) to another party (the assignee). In an assignment, the assignor remains a party to the original contract, but transfers some or all of their rights and obligations to the assignee. The assignee steps into the shoes of the assignor and assumes the rights and obligations associated with the contract.

One of the key attributes of assignment is that it does not require the consent of the other party to the original contract. The assignor can unilaterally transfer their rights and obligations to the assignee without seeking the consent of the other party. However, the assignor must provide notice to the other party about the assignment, as failure to do so may result in the assignment being ineffective.

Another important aspect of assignment is that it does not extinguish the original contract. The assignor remains liable to the other party for any breaches or obligations that existed prior to the assignment. This means that the assignee can enforce the rights under the original contract against the assignor if necessary.

Furthermore, assignment can be partial or complete. In a partial assignment, the assignor transfers only a portion of their rights and obligations to the assignee, while retaining the rest. In a complete assignment, the assignor transfers all of their rights and obligations to the assignee.

It is worth noting that certain rights and obligations may not be assignable. For example, personal services contracts or contracts that involve personal skill or expertise may not be assignable without the consent of the other party. Additionally, assignment may be prohibited by the terms of the original contract.

Novation, on the other hand, refers to the substitution of a new party for one of the original parties to a contract. In a novation, the original contract is extinguished, and a new contract is formed between the remaining original party and the new party. The new party assumes all the rights and obligations of the departing party, effectively replacing them in the contract.

Unlike assignment, novation requires the consent of all parties involved. The departing party, the remaining original party, and the new party must all agree to the novation and execute a novation agreement. This agreement explicitly states the intention to substitute the original party with the new party and outlines the rights and obligations that will be transferred.

Novation has the effect of releasing the departing party from any further liability or obligations under the original contract. Once the novation is complete, the departing party is no longer bound by the terms of the contract and is relieved of any future obligations. The new party assumes all the rights and obligations as if they were an original party to the contract.

It is important to note that novation is a more complex process compared to assignment. It involves the creation of a new contract and the consent of all parties, which may require additional negotiations and formalities. Novation is often used in situations where a party wants to completely replace an existing party with a new party, such as in mergers and acquisitions or when transferring ownership of a business.

While assignment and novation both involve the transfer of rights and obligations, there are several key differences between the two mechanisms. Let's explore these differences:

Assignment does not require the consent of the other party to the original contract, whereas novation requires the consent of all parties involved. In assignment, the assignor can unilaterally transfer their rights and obligations to the assignee without seeking the consent of the other party. Novation, on the other hand, requires the explicit agreement of all parties to substitute the original party with a new party.

Legal Implications

Assignment does not extinguish the original contract, and the assignor remains liable for any breaches or obligations that existed prior to the assignment. The assignee can enforce the rights under the original contract against the assignor if necessary. In contrast, novation extinguishes the original contract and releases the departing party from any further liability or obligations. The new party assumes all the rights and obligations as if they were an original party to the contract.

Novation is generally more complex compared to assignment. It involves the creation of a new contract and the consent of all parties, which may require additional negotiations and formalities. Assignment, on the other hand, is a simpler process that does not require the creation of a new contract or the consent of the other party to the original contract.

Extent of Transfer

Assignment can be partial or complete, depending on the intention of the assignor. The assignor can transfer only a portion of their rights and obligations to the assignee, while retaining the rest. In a complete assignment, the assignor transfers all of their rights and obligations to the assignee. Novation, on the other hand, involves the complete substitution of a new party for one of the original parties. The new party assumes all the rights and obligations of the departing party.

Prohibited Assignments

While assignment allows for the transfer of most rights and obligations, there may be certain rights and obligations that are not assignable. For example, personal services contracts or contracts that involve personal skill or expertise may not be assignable without the consent of the other party. Additionally, assignment may be prohibited by the terms of the original contract. Novation, on the other hand, does not face the same limitations as assignment, as it involves the creation of a new contract with the consent of all parties.

In conclusion, assignment and novation are two mechanisms used to transfer rights and obligations from one party to another. Assignment involves the transfer of rights and obligations from the assignor to the assignee, while the assignor remains a party to the original contract. Novation, on the other hand, involves the substitution of a new party for one of the original parties, resulting in the creation of a new contract.

While assignment does not require the consent of the other party and does not extinguish the original contract, novation requires the consent of all parties and releases the departing party from any further liability or obligations. Novation is generally more complex compared to assignment, and it allows for the complete substitution of a new party. However, both assignment and novation have their own legal implications and limitations, which should be carefully considered when transferring rights and obligations under a contract.

Comparisons may contain inaccurate information about people, places, or facts. Please report any issues.

• Search Search Please fill out this field.

What Is Novation?

How novation works, novation vs. assignment.

• Novation FAQs

The Bottom Line

• Corporate Finance

Novation: Definition in Contract Law, Types, Uses, and Example

Investopedia / Julie Bang

Novation is the replacement of one of the parties in an agreement between two parties, with the consent of all three parties involved. To novate is to replace an old obligation with a new one.

For example, a supplier who wants to relinquish a business customer might find another source for the customer. If all three agree, the contract can be torn up and replaced with a new contract that differs only in the name of the supplier. The old supplier relinquishes all rights and obligations of the contract to the new supplier.

Key Takeaways

• To novate is to replace an old obligation with a new one.
• In contract law, a novation replaces one of the parties in a two-party agreement with a third party, with the agreement of all three parties.
• In a novate, the original contract is void. The party that drops out has given up its benefits and obligations.
• In the financial markets, using a clearinghouse to vet a transaction between two parties is known as a novation.
• Novation is different than an assignment, where the original party to the agreement retains ultimate responsibility. Therefore, the original contract remains in place.

In legal language, novation is a transfer of both the "benefits and the burdens" of a contract to another party. Contract benefits may be anything. For example, the benefit could be payments for services. The burdens are the obligations taken on to earn the payment—in this example, the services. One party to the contract is willing to forgo the benefits and relinquish the duties.

Canceling a contract can be messy, expensive, and bad for an entity's reputation. Arranging for another party to fulfill the contract on the same terms, with the agreement of all parties, is better business.

Novations are often seen in the construction industry, where subcontractors may be juggling several jobs at once. Contractors may transfer certain jobs to other contractors with the client's consent.

Novations are most frequently used when a business is sold, or a corporation is taken over. The new owner may want to retain the business's contractual obligations, while the other parties want to continue their agreements without interruption. Novations smooth the transition.

Types of Novations

There are three types of novations:

• Standard : This novation occurs when two parties agree that new terms must be added to their contract, resulting in a new one.
• Expromissio : Three parties must be involved in this novation; a transferor, a counterparty, and a transferee. All three must agree to the new terms and make a new contract.
• Delegation : One of the parties in a contract passes their responsibilities to a new party, legally binding that party to the terms of the contract.

A novation is an alternative to the procedure known as an assignment .

In an assignment, one person or business transfers rights or property to another person or business. But the assignment passes along only the benefits, while any obligations remain with the original contract party. Novations pass along both benefits and potential liabilities to the new party.

For example, a sub-lease is an assignment. The original rental contract remains in place. The landlord can hold the primary leaseholder responsible for damage or non-payment by the sub-letter.

Novation gives rights and the obligations to the new party, and the old one walks away. The original contract is nullified.

In property law, novation occurs when a tenant signs a lease over to another party, which assumes both the responsibility for the rent and the liability for any subsequent damages to the property, as indicated in the original lease.

Generally, an assignment and a novation require the approval of all three parties involved.

A sub-lease agreement is usually an assignment, not a novation. The primary leaseholder remains responsible for non-payment or damage.

Novation Uses

Because a novation replaces a contract, it can be used in any business, industry, or market where contracts are used.

Financial Markets

In financial markets, novations are generally used in credit default swaps, options, or futures when contracts are transferred to a derivatives  market clearinghouse. A bilateral transaction is completed through the clearinghouse , which functions as an intermediary.

The sellers transfer the rights to and obligations of their securities to the clearinghouse. The clearinghouse, in turn, sells the securities to the buyers. Both the transferor (the seller) and transferee (the buyer) must agree to the terms of the novation, and the remaining party (the clearinghouse) must consent by a specific deadline. If the remaining party doesn't consent, the transferor and transferee must book a new trade and go through the process again.

Real Estate

Contracts are a part of real estate transactions, so novation is a valuable tool in the industry. If buyers and sellers enter into a contract, novation allows them to change it when issues arise during due diligence, inspection, or closing.

Commercial and residential rental contracts can be changed using novation if tenants or renters experience changes that affect their needs or ability to make payments.

Government Contracting

Federal, state, and local governments find it cheaper and beneficial for the economy to contract specific tasks rather than create an official workforce. Contracts are critical components for private or public companies who win a bid to do work for governments. If the contractor suddenly can't deliver on the contract or other issues prevent it from completing its task, the contractor can ask the government to recognize another party to complete the project.

A novation is not a unilateral contract mechanism. All concerned parties may negotiate the terms until a consensus is reached.

Banks use novation to transfer loans or other debts to different lenders. This typically involves canceling the contract and creating a new one with the exact terms and conditions of the old one.

Example of Novation

Novation can occur between any two parties. Consider the following example—Maria signed a contract with Chris to buy a cryptocurrency for $200. Chris has a contract with Uni for the same type of cryptocurrency for $200. These debt obligations may be simplified through a novation. By agreement of all three parties, a novation agreement is drawn, with a new contract in which Chris transfers the debt and its obligations to Maria. Maria pays Uni $200 in crypto. Chris receives (and pays) nothing.

Novations also allow for revisions of payment terms as long as the parties involved agree. For example, say Uni decided not to accept crypto but wanted cash instead. If Maria agrees, a novation occurs, and new payment terms are entered on a contract.

What Is a Novation?

In novation, one party in a two-party agreement gives up all rights and obligations outlined in a contract to a third party. As a result, the original contract is canceled.

What Is The Meaning of Novation Agreement?

In novation, the rights and obligations of one party to a two-party contract are transferred to a third party, with the agreement of all three parties.

Is Novation a New Contract?

Yes, because the old contract is invalidated or "extinguished" when the new contract is signed.

In a novation, when all parties agree, one party in a two-party agreement gives up all rights and obligations outlined in a contract to a third party. As a result, the original contract is canceled.

Novation differs from an assignment, where one party gives up all rights outlined in the contract but remains responsible for fulfilling its terms. The original contract remains in place.

International Swaps and Derivatives Association. " ISDA Novation Protocol ."

General Services Administration. " Subpart 42.12 - Novation and Change-of-Name Agreements ."

• Terms of Service
• Editorial Policy
• Privacy Policy

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

Novation and assignment

Changing the parties bound to a contract

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

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

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

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

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

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

Novation in practice

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

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

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

Other examples

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

There are other examples too, which are more obscure.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But what happens if it does not?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Assignment transfers benefits only

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

When assignment can invalidate your contract

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

Personal obligations and assignment

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

Buying the right document

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

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

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

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

Transfer of a right to receive the repayment of a debt

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

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

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

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

Transfer of an architectural or building contract

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

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

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

Assignment of a business lease

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

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

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

Assignment of copyright

We have  number of assignment agreements for intellectual property rights .

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

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

Assignment of a life insurance policy or endowment policy

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

Assignment and collateral warranties in the construction industry

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

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

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

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.

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
• 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 September 2024

Planning reform: what to expect from the new Government plans?

The newly elected Labour government can now resume work on various legislative proposals pledged in its election manifesto. There are several bills which may have impact on commercial property in the UK.

• 12 September 2024
• Privacy and Data Protection

2024 in review: tracking key data protection developments

As we approach the final quarter of 2024, it’s an opportune moment to revisit the data protection trends and developments that were anticipated at the end of 2023. Now, let’s see how those predictions have played out.

• 10 September 2024

Sun, Fun and fairness – Amanda Glover writes for Business Voice magazine

Amanda Glover in Business Voice magazine discusses how employees at Harrods, the iconic luxury department store in London, are considering strike action over what the workers deem to be a discriminatory annual leave policy.

• 06 September 2024
• Corporate and M&A

How to exit your business – Reading Seminar

Due to popular demand, Nicky Goringe Larkin and Stuart Mullins, will be hosting a repeat of the ‘How to exit your business’ seminar at Clarkslegal’s Reading office.

• 05 September 2024
• Public Procurement

Public Procurement Annual Update 2024

The Procurement Act 2023 is coming into force on 24 February 2025, bringing with it major changes to public procurement procedures and legal remedies. Join our Public Procurement team as they provide you with the essential information you need to know.

• 02 September 2024

Social Media – how private is your personal data

Nowadays most people have at least one social media account. Whether it’s Facebook or TikTok, X, or LinkedIn, most adults have an online presence.

Search for:

Jump straight to:

Please enter a search term

What sectors are you interested in?

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

Sign-up and we’ll remember your preferences

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

Got an account already? Sign in

Want to speak to an advisor from your closest office?

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

Out-Law Analysis 10 min. read

Construction law terms: assignment and novation

14 Jul 2023, 12:44 pm

The terms ‘assignment’ and ‘novation’ are sometimes used interchangeably in relation to construction projects, but they are, in fact, very different.

While both involve bringing in a new party to the contractual arrangements, they have very distinct practical consequences. This guide examines the difference between both terms explains important differences, looks at how these differences have been illustrated in recent case law and offers some practical takeaways.

It is important to note that the ‘assignment’ of one party’s interest in a contract to another party is only partial, because the process only transfers the benefit of the first party’s interest. Assignment does not also transfer the first party’s obligations under that contract to the second party.

For example, the employer (Party A) under a building contract might assign the benefit of a collateral warranty granted to it by the contractor (Party B) or a subcontractor, to the purchaser of the development (Party C). That assignment does not transfer the burden of any of the employer’s obligations – they remain the same.

Another example showing how an assignment can only transfer the benefit of a contract, not the burden, under a building contract would be:

• the developer’s rights to have the works constructed or to sue the building contractor if the works are defective, are benefits – so can be assigned;
• the developer’s obligation to pay the contract price is a burden – so cannot be assigned.

The assignment of the benefit of a contract to Party C does not replace the parties to the original contract. However, after the assignment, Party C is entitled to the benefit of the contract and to enforce its rights against Party B. Party A cannot do so – as they have assigned those benefits onto Party C. However, because the burden has not transferred, Party A will remain liable to Party B for the performance of all obligations under the contract.

Read more in our construction law terms series

• Construction law terms: general and liquidated damages
• Construction law terms: design development and design change
• Construction law terms: termination at common law and under contract
• Construction law terms: claims under contract vs breach of contract claims
• Construction law terms: contractual notices and condition precedent notices
• Construction law terms: set off, abatement and counterclaims

The ordinary position is that an assignment will transfer the benefit of accrued and also of future rights. It is possible to agree something different – for example the transfer of future rights only – but clear and express words are required.

It is essential for parties that are considering assigning the benefit of a contract to check the terms of the contract first. This is because many contracts exclude or qualify the right to assignment, such as by limiting the number of times it can be assigned. By way of example, clause 7.1 of the standard form JCT Design and Build Contract 2016 states: “neither the Employer nor the Contractor shall without the consent of the other assign this Contract or any rights thereunder”.

In practice, however, this clause is very often amended, so parties must make sure to check the terms, and any schedule of amendments, carefully. 

One common amendment adds wording that the consent of the other party to assignment “shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed”. While there is surprisingly little case law on what this means in practice, there is some authority to suggest that it means, at least, that the party required to provide consent must act honestly and in good faith, and must not withhold consent arbitrarily, capriciously or unreasonably.

Lastly, assignment can be statutory – sometimes referred to as ‘legal assignment’ – or equitable.  Statutory assignment must comply with the requirements of s.136 of the 1925 Law of Property Act, which includes a requirement to notify the other party to the contract (Party B) of the assignment in writing. If the assignment does not comply with the formalities in the Act, it will be an equitable assignment. 

The most pertinent difference between an equitable and statutory assignment is that the party (Party C) to whom the benefit is assigned cannot enforce in its own name and must join Party A in any action. This prevents Party B from being sued by Party C in circumstances where Party B has had no notice of the earlier assignment. 

If you want to transfer the burden of a contract as well as the benefit under it, you have to novate. In effect this creates a new contract between the two new parties and releases one of the parties from the contractual chain. The key requirement of novation is that it needs consent of all three parties involved. If Parties A and B have a contract between them, but Party A wishes to substitute Party C in its place then Parties A, B and C must all consent to this. 

Because the consent of all parties is required it will typically be documented in a tripartite agreement, signed by the novating party, the party to whom the contract is being novated and the third party. The agreement will in practice commonly be executed as a deed, otherwise some form of consideration must be provided by the party to whom the contract is being novated. 

If the parties do all consent to novation, the effect is that the original contract between Party A and B is extinguished and is replaced by a new one between Party B and C, which duplicates the rights and obligations of those under the original contract. Novation does not cancel past rights and obligations under the original contract, although the parties can agree to novate these as well.

In the context of a construction project, novation commonly occurs in design and build projects where the employer may engage consultants in the pre-construction design process. The building contract between the employer and contractor will often provide for the novation of these design consultants to the contractor. 

More generally, novation frequently occurs as a result of a company group restructuring or sale. On large infrastructure projects you might also see the novation of contracts to a special purpose vehicle (SPV) company that is set up specifically for the project. 

Key differences between assignment and novation

Case law involving assignment and novation

A good starting point is the Commercial Court case of The Argo Fund Ltd v Essar Steel Ltd, in which the judge summarised the four main differences between assignment and novation.

• A novation requires the consent of all three parties involved. By contrast, Party A can assign without the consent of either Party B or Party C – unless the contract states otherwise.
• A novation involves the termination of one contract and the creation of a new one in its place. In the case of an assignment Party A’s existing contractual rights are transferred to Party B, but the contract remains the same and Party A remains a party to it so far as its obligations are concerned.
• A novation involves the transfer of both benefits and obligations to the new party, whereas an assignment concerns only the transfer of benefits.
• Novation involves the termination of a contract and the creation of a new one so consideration is required, unless a party uses a deed which is generally enforceable without consideration. By contrast, assignment can be completed without the need for consideration.

Energy Works (Hull) Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd

There are a number of cases where it has not been entirely clear whether a contract has been assigned or novated. A recent example is the 2020 ruling in the dispute between Energy Works (Hull) Ltd and MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd. The employer, Energy Works, engaged MW High Tech (MW) as a contractor. MW engaged Outotec as subcontractor.

The project did not go as planned and Energy Works terminated the main contract, which provided that, on termination, MW must assign its subcontracts to Energy Works. MW did so, but there was confusion over whether it retained the benefit of any accrued or future rights under the Outotec subcontract. 

MW’s primary case was that the assignment of the subcontract only assigned future rights, not accrued rights. It argued, therefore, that it could claim for these past breaches. Its alternative case was that if accrued and future rights were transferred, then properly construed the assignment also transferred accrued and future liabilities and therefore took effect as a novation. 

On the primary case, the judge found that the natural meaning of the words “ assign the sub-contract ” was to assign the benefit of all rights under that contract, both accrued and future. She explained that it is possible to retain accrued rights, which could form the basis of a claim, and assign future rights only, however clear words are needed and were absent here.

On the alternative case the judge disagreed that the transfer took effect as a novation. The parties called the transfer an assignment which, whilst not conclusive, was consistent with the wider factual background that suggested there was no intention for the subcontract to terminate and be replaced with a new one – as would occur with a novation.

The practical effect of this assignment was that MW had transferred away its right to pursue Outotec for damages, including any argument that its delay was what caused the termination. However, in a ‘double whammy’, MW remained liable to pay Outotec for works done under the subcontract and for any further works Outotec performed after the assignment.

At the same time, MW could not claim payment in respect of those works until the final account’s reckoning – which would not be until 90 days after eventual completion. MW remained liable to Energy Works for liquidated damages, replacement contractor costs and any defects. 

Practical implications

Assignment and novation are different ways of transferring an interest under a contract, but with very different practical effects; the terms should not be used interchangeably. Parties should be especially careful in relation to post-termination assignment or novation terms.

They should also be clear what they are trying to do from the outset and consider how it has to be documented – by notice of assignment or deed of novation. Parties should check the terms of their contract. Is there a prohibition or other restriction on assignment? They must ensure they comply with them. For a legal assignment, parties must follow the requirements of s.136 of the 1925 Law of Property Act. This includes a requirement to notify contract counterparties. 

If a party is assigning a contract, or is to be obliged to do so post termination, they should consider carefully whether they want to assign accrued and future rights. If they wish to do something different – for example by retaining accrued rights so they have a route to claim against a subcontractor – then clear words are needed.

Co-written by Callum Miller of Pinsent Masons.

Editor's note 03/04/24:  This article was updated to properly reflect the outcome of the Energy Works v MW High Tech case. We regret the error.

• Construction Advisory & Disputes
• Construction Claims
• Construction Contracts
• Construction Disputes
• Infrastructure
• Litigation and arbitration
• Real Estate
• United Kingdom

Neal Morris

Latest News

Eu, uk and us sign world’s first ai treaty, nis2 compliance hampered across eu as october deadline approaches, employment horizon scanning, regulations extend banks’ uk trade sanctions reporting obligations, new uk trade sanctions civil enforcement regime introduced, don't miss a thing.

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

You might also like

Out-Law News

Broad scope for building liability orders highlighted by ruling

A new ruling shows how construction contractors facing claims for defective building works in England or Wales might seek a ‘building liability order’ (BLO) against other defendants to reduce their financial exposure, an expert in building safety and construction dispute resolution has said.

UK government consults on reforms to money laundering regulations

The UK Treasury has opened a consultation on improving money laundering regulations and reducing burdens on legitimate customers.

ICO unveils new data protection fining guidance

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has published new guidance setting out how it will determine penalty notices and calculate fines under the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA).

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

Out-Law Analysis

Pensions disputes: managing member expectations paramount

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

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

'Vast majority' of companies not seeking to avoid tax

'World first' industrial decarbonisation strategy developed in the UK

3D printing: UK product safety issues

5G potential for business highlighted in UK funding programme

Sectors and what we do

Sectors we work in.

• Financial Services
• Technology, Science & Industry
• Your assets
• Your company
• Your finance
• Your legal team and resource
• Your people
• Your risks and regulatory environment

Your privacy matters to us

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

• Open navigation Close navigation
• Private Office
• Client Area

Expert Insights

Assignment, novation and construction contracts - What is your objective?

Consider a not too hypothetical situation where the parties to a construction project (employer, contractor and sub-contractor) enter into a Deed of Assignment intending that the employer, having lost confidence in the contractor, would directly engage the sub-contractor to complete the sub-contract works. But what if no assignment has taken place? What are the terms of the contract under which the sub-contractor carries out the works for the employer?

Potential risks with assignment

In construction projects, main contractors often assign the benefit of their key sub-contracts to the employer in the event of contractor default and consequent termination of the main contract. The employer can then enforce the rights in the sub-contract against the sub-contractor, including rectification of the works and the performance of particular obligations.

However, there are potential risks associated with assignment in these situations as the Technology and Construction Court’s decision in Energy Works (Hull) Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd demonstrated. We discussed this decision in Assigning a sub-contract on termination: which rights is the contractor giving up? In this case, the nature of the assignment meant that the main contractor could not pursue claims made by the employer against its sub-contractor under the sub-contract. This limited the main contractor’s ability to ‘pass on’ any liability it had under the main contract to the sub-contractor.

But what if the Deed of Assignment does not take effect as an assignment?

Assignment v novation

Both assignment and novation are forms of transferring an interest under a contract from one party to another. However, they are very different and in their effect. An assignment transfers the benefit of a contract from one party to another, but only the benefit, not the burden. In contrast, a novation will transfer both the benefit and the burden of a contract from one party to another. A novation creates a new contractual relationship - a ‘new’ contract is entered into.

Another key difference with novation is that the consent of all parties concerned must be obtained, which is why novation is almost always effected through a tripartite agreement. In the case of an assignment, it is not always necessary to obtain consent, subject to what the specific terms of the contract provide.

When deciding whether to assign or novate, parties should consider (i) whether there is in fact a burden to novate, (ii) whether the novatee will be willing to take on the burden, (iii) whether all parties will consent to the novation and indeed enter into the agreement. If there is no burden under the contract to transfer, then an assignment is likely to be the most appropriate way to transfer the interests.

Is the Deed for an assignment or a novation?

Although a document may be labelled a Deed of Assignment, if it has references to the transfer of ‘ responsibilities and obligations ’ and is a tripartite agreement these are characteristic of a novation as opposed to an assignment.

A key issue in such circumstances is to ascertain whether making use of the words ‘ assigning ’ and ‘ assignment ’ actually affects the characteristics of the document.

There has been some consideration of this characterisation issue by the courts. In the case of Burdana v Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 1980, by majority the Court of Appeal decided that on the facts of the case, although the Deed of Assignment in question referred to an ‘ assignment ’ of the benefit and burden, on proper analysis there was indeed a novation.

Furthermore, in the case of Langston Group Corporation v Cardiff City FC [2008] EWHC 535, Briggs J made it evident that even though the variation agreement in question did not use the word ‘ novation ’ and did not describe itself as such, the circumstances and effect of the agreement was indeed a novation and a new contract had been created.

It may be the case that even if a document does not describe itself as a novation, yet has the key characteristics of one, then as a matter of interpretation the courts would accept that the document takes effect as a novation.

Key characteristics of a novation

If entering into a document that purports to be a Deed of Assignment, tread carefully as it may well take effect as a novation, particularly if the following characteristics are present:

• It is a tripartite agreement;
• All the parties give their consent;
• The novator has been released from its obligations;
• There has been an acceptance of the terms of the novation on the part of the novatee and the substituted party; and
• There is a vesting of remedies.

What is your objective?

Although a document may well be labelled as an assignment, it may have the characteristics of and take effect as novation. Parties need to be cautious and consider what they want to achieve when assessing whether to assign rights or to novate them along with obligations.

This article was written by Anna Sowerby and Eveline Strecker. For more information, please contact Anna  or your usual Charles Russell Speechlys contact.

Our thinking

Striking the Balance: Working Effectively with In-House Counsel on Large Construction Disputes

Alim Khamis FCIArb

CTBUH Annual Conference: Mastering ESG Challenges and the Launch of the Global In-House Counsel Assembly

Kerry Stares

Emergency Arbitrations – what they are and when to use them

Charles Russell Speechlys hosts its second International Arbitration Conference in London

Gareth Mills

Quick Reads

“This is going to hurt” – potential implications of the forthcoming Budget on financial arrangements on divorce

Charlotte Posnansky

Caroline Greenwell and Bella Henry write for FT Adviser on the SFO’s annual report

Caroline Greenwell

In the Press

Nick Hurley and Isaac Bate write for Law 360 on the Labour Party’s worker reform plans

Nick Hurley

What could we see in a Planning and Infrastructure Bill?

Sadie Pitman

Employment (Allocation of Tips) Act 2023 – Coming into force on 1 October 2024

Michael Powner

AP News and over 170 US outlets quote Gareth Mills on the Google EU monopoly ruling

Buying and Selling Swiss Property – Tips for Non-Swiss Nationals and Non-Swiss Residents

Sophie Hart

Dan Pollard writes for City AM’s Notebook section on Labour’s pledge to guarantee “day one rights for all workers”

Dan Pollard

IBA Annual Conference 2024

Charlotte Ford

How the forewarned ‘hike’ on private school fees is going to bite – a family law and Private Office perspective

Jemimah Fleet

Agricultural Holdings: Changes to succession rules are now in effect

Helena Taynton

Asian Private Banker quotes Dominic Lawrance and Julia Cox on anticipated tax changes in the UK

Dominic Lawrance

Mark Howard writes for the Financial Times’ Your Questions column on the pros and cons of becoming a non-executive director

Mark Howard

Choosing the applicable law for a Construction Contract – the case for ‘the law of the DIFC’

Charles Russell Speechlys advises Mirova on its $20 million debt funding to ManoCap Energy

Daniel Sullivan

Summer 2024 Deal Roundup

David Coates

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

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

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

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

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

How to bookmark a page on iPhone 

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

How to bookmark a page on Android 

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

How to bookmark a page on Windows 

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

How to bookmark a page on Blackberry 

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

Search Filters

• Member log in

Jurisdiction / Region

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

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

Our Expertise

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

Contracts: The critical difference between Assignment and Novation

Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

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

Assignment and novation in the Construction Industry

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

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

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

Related content

Cms annual review of english construction law developments: an international perspective, grenfell tower inquiry final report: key findings and recommendations, one case to bind them all - class actions and res judicata.

• Follow us on:
• LinkedIn  

© CMS Legal 2024

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Notice
• Cookie Notice

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

How founders can succeed in the startup ecosystem, resolving commercial disputes without going to court, navigating commercial property disputes: resolving common conflicts , how to prevent and manage a data breach in your business, 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

2024 Law Company of the Year Finalist - The Lawyer Awards

2024 Law Firm of the Year Finalist - Modern Law Private Client Awards

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

View all Insights

What is the Difference Between Assignment and Novation?

Assignment of contracts is a fairly common practice in the business world.  

In an assignment, the person assigning the contract - the "Assignor" - assigns the benefits of the contract the Assignor holds to a new person (the "Assignee") who takes the benefit of that contract "the Assignee". Some contracts may expressly prohibit assignment and some contracts provide that a contract may not be assigned without the consent of the other party. If a contract has no provision relating to assignment, then the general rule is that it may be assigned, with a few exceptions. 1

Usually, a contractual party will want to ensure that if a contract is assigned, then the Assignee has sufficient skill and financial backing to continue to perform the contract and, if this is the case, it is important to make sure an assignment provision in a contract takes account of that so consent can be withheld if an Assignee does not fulfil those criteria.

Critically, in an assignment, the general law states that the Assignee takes the benefit but not the burden of the contract.  

This means that if the Assignee does not perform the contract, the Assignor remains liable. This can sometimes leave the other contractual party with a remedy if the Assignee is insolvent and does not perform. 2  However, as noted earlier, the best way of dealing with an assignment request is to complete due diligence on the Assignee, since it may be that if you later need to make a demand on the Assignor (particularly if they are a company), the Assignor may no longer be able to meet that demand under the assigned contract if the Asignee fails to perform it. For example, a company selling its business to an Assignee may liquidate following the sale (after paying all creditors at that time and returning a final dividend to shareholders), which makes it very difficult to make any later claim against it if the Assignee does not perform the contract.

An assignment is fundamentally different from a novation. In a novation, a new contract is entered into between the new party (the "Novatee") and the other continuing contracting party/parties and the original party (the "Novator") is released from all of their obligations (usually from the date the novation takes effect). For this reason, a novation poses a greater risk to the continuing contract party or parties than an assignment since they have no recourse against the Novator if the Novatee fails to perform the contract. If someone makes a request to you for novation, you should treat the request very seriously. You should consider obtaining consideration for the consent or some form of guarantee and will need to complete very rigorous due diligence on the new party to make sure they can perform the contract. You should also check when you enter into a new contract with anyone that the contract does not allow the other party to novate the contract, particularly without your consent and a rigorous agreed process in place for that consent to allow you to assure yourself the party that takes novation can perform the contract.

Assignment and novation can be a tricky area of law. As always, if you have an issue with assignment or novation or encounter an unusual clause in a new contract concerning assignment or novation, you should take legal advice – we are happy to help!

See our Expertise pages

‍ Contract Law

____________________________

1    Exceptions include "personal" contracts where the particular skill, identity or characteristics of a party are fundamental to the contract. Bare rights of litigation are also not assignable.

2     Note that Section 241 of the Property Law Act 2007 has special provisions in respect of leases that make assignors liable for payment of rent and obligation under the lease, but not for increased obligations the assignee and landlord might agree to on a variation of lease unless the lease provided for that variation.

© McVeagh Fleming 2020

This article is published for general information purposes only.  Legal content in this article is necessarily of a general nature and should not be relied upon as legal advice.  If you require specific legal advice in respect of any legal issue, you should always engage a lawyer to provide that advice.

Recent Posts

Related topics, subscribe to receive updates.

• Our Insights

Guilherme Mazui

• What is the Difference Between Novation and Assignment?

Novation and assignment are both methods of transferring interests in a contract, but they differ in the extent of the transfer and the impact on the original contract. Here are the key differences:

• Transfer of Rights and Obligations :
• Assignment: Transfers some rights to a third party, but the original party retains some obligations. The original contract remains in effect, and the assignee takes over the assigned rights, but the assignor retains the obligations that were not assigned.
• Novation: Transfers both rights and obligations to a third party, creating an entirely new legal relationship. The original contract is terminated and replaced with a new contract between the original party and the new party.
• Assignment: Requires the consent of the obligor (the party obligated to fulfill the contract) and the assignor. The obligor needs to agree to the assignee taking over the rights held by the assignor, and the assignor must provide notice to the obligor about the assignment.
• Novation: Requires the consent of both original parties to the contract and the new incoming third party. All three parties must agree to the novation for it to be valid.
• Original Contract :
• Assignment: The original contract remains in effect, and the assignee takes over the assigned rights, but the assignor retains the obligations that were not assigned.
• Novation: The original contract is terminated and replaced with a new contract between the original party and the new party. The original contract becomes unenforceable.

Choosing 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, as it enables the transfer of specific rights while retaining some obligations. On the other hand, if a party wants to completely transfer both the benefits and burdens of a contract to another party, novation is the appropriate method.

Comparative Table: Novation vs Assignment

Here is a table outlining the key differences between novation and assignment:

Choosing between novation and assignment depends on various factors, such as the parties' desire to maintain involvement and responsibility in the original contract and the specific requirements of the contract itself.

• Assignment vs Delegation
• Contract vs Agreement
• Hire vs Lease
• Freelance vs Contract
• Covenant vs Contract
• Rental vs Lease
• Joint Venture vs Licensing
• Lessor vs Lessee
• Loan vs Lease
• Lease vs License
• Deed vs Agreement
• Consignor vs Consignee
• Bailment vs Pledge
• Award vs Agreement
• MOU vs Contract
• Joint Venture vs Partnership
• Joint Venture vs Collaboration
• Ownership vs Possession
• Mortgage vs Hypothecation

CALL US FOR A FREE CONSULTATION: 0207 459 4037

• Professional Negligence
• Insolvency Practitioners
• Statutory Demand
• Winding-Up Petitions
• Validation Orders
• Liquidation
• Administration
• Breach of Fiduciary Duties
• Illegal Dividends
• Lien & Floating Charge
• HMRC Claims
• Members Voluntary Liquidation
• Company Voluntary Arrangement
• Creditors Voluntary Liquidation
• Directors Loan Account
• Company Restoration
• Bankruptcy Petitions
• Bankruptcy Restrictions
• Debt Relief Orders (DROs)
• Annulment of Bankruptcy
• Individual Voluntary Arrangement
• Bailiffs & Enforcement Officers
• Director & Shareholder Disputes
• Breach of Director Duties
• Misappropriation of Funds
• Diverting Business
• Just & Equitable Winding-Up
• Negligence by Director
• Undisclosed Interest
• Liquidator Claims
• Excusing Liability
• Director’s Loan
• Director Disqualification
• Unfair Prejudice Petition
• Derivative Claim
• Restoration of Company Property
• HMRC Tax Disputes
• HMRC Tax Appeals
• HMRC Assessments & Penalties
• Appeal to Tax Tribunal
• HMRC Mediation
• Judicial Review HMRC Decision
• VAT De-registration
• Tax Investigations
• Furlough Investigations
• Tax Avoidance Schemes
• IR35 Legislation
• Cryptoassets Tax Investigations
• Voluntary Disclosure
• Missing Trader Fraud (VAT Evasion)
• Disguised Remuneration
• Criminal Prosecution
• VAT Repayment Fraud
• Tax Evasion
• Director’s Loan Account
• Offshore Tax Evasion
• EU Taxes MARD
• Enforcement
• HMRC Insolvency
• Debt Recovery
• UK Debt Recovery
• International Debt Recovery
• Asset Tracer & Due Diligence
• Simple Interest Calculator
• Banking & Finance
• Mis-sold Financial Products
• LIBOR Mis-selling
• Trading Platform Claims
• Loss of Investment
• FCA Authorisation
• FCA Investigation
• FCA Restrictions
• AML Compliance
• Fraud & Financial Crime
• Finance Professional Negligence
• Cryptocurrency
• Fraud & Cybercrime Regulation
• Exchange Disputes
• NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens)
• Smart Contract Disputes
• Crypto Arbitration
• Crypto Intellectual Property
• Crypto Consultancy
• Crypto Recovery Group
• Costs & Detailed Assessment
• Breach of Contract
• Partnership Disputes
• Defamation & Reputation
• Intellectual Property
• Design Rights
• Construction
• Payment Applications
• Adjudication
• Delay & Liquidated Damages
• Defective Work & Quality
• Termination & Suspension of Works
• Arbitration
• Procurement & Tendering Disputes
• Insurance & Coverage Issues
• Franchising
• Client Stories
• News & Podcasts
• Free Guides
• Ready to Send Files?
• Insolvency & Claims Tracker
• Refer & Earn

What is the difference between Assignment vs. Novation

• April 4, 2024

When it comes to business agreements, there are some terms and concepts that can be confusing. Two such terms are assignment and novation. While they may seem similar, they have distinct differences that are important to understand to properly navigate business agreements. Our expert lawyers will explore the difference between assignment and novation, and how they can impact your business agreements.

Are you facing challenges with assignments or novations in your business contracts? Call us for a Free Consultation with our expert solicitors today on 0207 459 4037 or complete our booking form below to schedule your consultation.

What is Assignment?

Assignment is the transfer of rights and obligations from one party to another. This means that one party, known as the assignor, transfers their rights and obligations under a contract to another party, known as the assignee. The assignee then becomes responsible for fulfilling the obligations and receiving the benefits outlined in the contract.

Examples of Assignment

An example of an assignment would be if a company sells a piece of property to another company. The original company would assign their rights and obligations under the contract to the new company, who would then take over ownership of the property and be responsible for fulfilling the terms of the contract.

Another example would be if a freelancer assigns their rights and obligations under a contract to a subcontractor. The subcontractor would then take over the work and be responsible for fulfilling the terms of the contract.

Types of Assignments

Assignments can take various forms depending on the nature of the contract and the parties involved. Here are some common types of assignments:

Absolute Assignment

In an absolute assignment, the assignor transfers all their rights and obligations to the assignee without any conditions. This type of assignment is irrevocable and the assignor no longer has any control over the rights transferred.

Conditional Assignment

A conditional assignment is one where the transfer of rights and obligations is subject to certain conditions being met. The assignment only becomes effective when the specified conditions are fulfilled.

Partial Assignment

In a partial assignment, only a portion of the rights and obligations under a contract are transferred to the assignee. The assignor retains some control over the remaining rights and obligations.

Legal Assignment

A legal assignment involves the transfer of legal ownership of rights and obligations to the assignee. This type of assignment is enforceable in court and provides the assignee with legal protection against any claims from third parties.

Equitable Assignment

An equitable assignment does not involve the transfer of legal ownership, but rather an intention to transfer the rights and obligations. This type of assignment is based on principles of fairness and equitable remedies.

Multiple Assignments

Multiple assignments occur when the same rights and obligations are assigned to more than one assignee. This situation can lead to complex legal issues and disputes over which the assignee has a valid claim to the rights.

What is Novation?

Novation is the replacement of one party in a contract with a new party. This means that one party, known as the transferor, transfers all of their rights and obligations under a contract to a new party, known as the transferee. The transferee then becomes a party to the contract and is responsible for fulfilling the obligations and receiving the benefits outlined in the contract.

Examples of Novation

An example of novation would be if a company sells their business to another company. The original company would transfer all of their rights and obligations under the business contracts to the new company, who would then become responsible for fulfilling the terms of the contracts.

Another example would be if a company merges with another company. The two companies would enter into a novation agreement, where one company would transfer all of their rights and obligations under their contracts to the other company.

Types of Novation

Novation is a complex legal concept that involves the substitution of one party to a contract with a new party. There are several types of novation that are commonly used in business agreements. Here are the key types of novation:

Full Novation

A full novation involves the complete substitution of one party to a contract with a new party. This means that the original party relinquishes all rights and obligations under the contract, and the new party assumes full responsibility for fulfilling those obligations.

Parallel Novation

In a parallel novation, a new party is added to the existing contract alongside the original parties. This new party shares the rights and obligations of one of the original parties without replacing them entirely. This type of novation is often used in complex business transactions where multiple parties are involved.

Temporary Novation

Temporary novation is a type of novation where the substitution of parties is only for a specific period of time or under certain conditions. Once the specified period or conditions are met, the original party may resume their rights and obligations under the contract.

Permanent Novation

Permanent novation, on the other hand, involves a permanent substitution of parties in a contract. The original party permanently exits the contract, and the new party takes over all rights and obligations for the duration of the contract.

Bilateral Novation

Bilateral novation occurs when all parties involved in the contract agree to the substitution of one party with a new party. This type of novation requires the consent of all parties to the contract for the substitution to be valid.

Unilateral Novation

In unilateral novation, only one party to the contract seeks to be substituted by a new party without the consent of the other party. This type of novation may involve legal complexities and challenges, as the non-consenting party may seek to dispute the validity of the substitution.

Key Differences Between Assignment and Novation

While assignment and novation may seem similar, there are key differences that are important to understand including:

Transfer of Rights and Obligations

The main difference between assignment and novation is the transfer of rights and obligations. In assignment, the assignor transfers their rights and obligations to the assignee, but they still remain a party to the contract. In novation, the transferor completely transfers all of their rights and obligations to the transferee and is no longer a party to the contract.

Consent of All Parties

Another key difference is the consent of all parties involved. In assignment, the assignor and assignee must both agree to the transfer of rights and obligations. However, the other party in the contract does not need to give their consent. In novation, all parties involved must agree to the replacement of the transferor with the transferee.

In assignment, the assignor remains liable for any breaches of the contract, even after the assignment. The assignee is only responsible for fulfilling the obligations outlined in the contract. In novation, the transferor is no longer liable for any breaches of the contract, as they are no longer a party to the contract. The transferee assumes all liability for fulfilling the obligations outlined in the contract.

Impact on the Original Contract

In assignment, the original contract remains in effect, with the only change being the transfer of rights and obligations. In novation, the original contract is terminated and a new contract is created between the remaining party and the transferee.

When to Use Assignment vs. Novation

The decision to use assignment or novation in a business agreement depends on the specific circumstances and goals of the parties involved:

• Assignment is typically used when one party wants to transfer their rights and obligations under a contract to another party but still wants to remain a party to the contract. This can be beneficial if the assignor wants to maintain a relationship with the other party, or if they want to continue receiving benefits outlined in the contract.
• Novation is typically used when one party wants to completely transfer all of their rights and obligations under a contract to a new party. This can be beneficial if the transferor wants to completely exit the contract and have no further involvement, or if the transferee wants to become a party to the contract and receive all benefits outlined in the contract.

Expert Business Contract Solicitors

While assignment and novation may seem similar, they have distinct differences that are important to understand to properly navigate business agreements.

Assignment involves the transfer of rights and obligations from one party to another, while novation involves the replacement of one party with a new party. The decision to use assignment or novation depends on the specific circumstances and goals of the parties involved. By understanding the difference between assignment and novation, you can ensure that your business agreements are properly executed and fulfilled.

For expert legal advice on assignment and novation matters, don’t hesitate to contact our expert business and commercial solicitors at 0207 459 4037 for a Free Consultation today.

Karim Oualnan, Partner

• 0207 459 4037
• [email protected]
• Connect on LinkedIn

Client Success Stories

£810k Statutory Demand Successfully Set Aside – Indemnity Costs Awarded

£85k settlement in director and shareholder dispute in 3 months, £80k statutory demands successfully withdrawn in under 4 weeks, £120k settlement secured for entrepreneur within 2 weeks, £7k recovered for breach of contract in 4 weeks, £30k claim settled plus 100% of costs in 3 weeks, £135k judgment obtained for client plus 100% of costs, how can we help.

£50,000+ Claim Settled

£10,000 Bank Dispute Settled

£35,000 Recovered & 100% costs

£75,000+ Negligence Claim Settled

Service Charge Dispute for 100+ Residents

Tax Investigation & Dispute

Choose Excellence in Dispute Resolution

Our mission.

Our litigation solicitors have a proven track record of delivering successful outcomes for clients. Go Legal was founded to make exceptional lawyers accessible and solutions affordable.

Our lawyers and mediators have decades of experience and specialise exclusively in commercial litigation. Our  lawyers have been described as “ the best litigators in the country ” & provide solutions to clients in the following areas of law:

• Director/Shareholder Disputes
• Banking & Finance Disputes

Karim Oualnan

Partner and Managing Director

Having worked more than a decade in law and fuelled by his passion for access to justice, Karim envisaged a different law firm – one that stood as a symbol of hope, fairness, and an unwavering dedication to justice. By providing legal services through a partnership with Go Legal and Spencer West, Karim has been able to create this vision.

Karim did not have a storybook beginning. His childhood echoed with challenges, where he witnessed his family and friends struggle with legal issues.  It made him realise that there are individuals and businesses caught up in the complexities of the UK legal system who need reliable, affordable and technically astute lawyers to get results.

Our lawyers make a promise – we will work hard to achieve the best outcome for you. We are here to help!

Our firm’s values ensure that we consistently exceed client expectations. We are:

• Honest:   Our lawyers are trusted by many clients
• Generous:  We are technically astute lawyers with compassion, & a genuine desire to help
• Dedication:   Our lawyers tackle each case with relentless dedication & work tirelessly to achieve a successful outcome
• Innovative:   We have access to technology &   strategies not used by other law firms
• Guardians: Our lawyers will guide you through every legal step, ensuring clarity & understanding at all stages

*through our exclusive partnership with Spencer West LLP

Our lawyers are regulated and members of:

Why instruct Go Legal

Our team of award-winning legal experts are renowned for their technical expertise, honesty and dependability. We prioritise customer satisfaction by providing personalised attention and ensuring that we consistently exceed our clients' expectations throughout.

Rapid Response​

We understand the urgency of legal matters and offer 24/7 support to clients. Whether you require immediate assistance with legal advice or representation, our team is always available to provide prompt and reliable support. We will create a Whatsapp group with you and your legal team once instructed if you have any out of hours questions throughout your litigation and dispute resolution case.

Fair and Transparent pricing

We provide honest estimates for our legal services at the very outset. We are often instructed on an hourly rate basis, but we can offer discounted fixed fee packages, and no-win no fee agreements. For further information, please see our Funding page which sets out some of the packages we may be able to offer clients.

Fast & Reliable

Efficiency and dedication to our clients’ needs are the cornerstones of our practice. We have earned the appreciation and praise of clients and even our opponents by consistently meeting high standards and delivering exceptional results.

Qualified and Regulated

Our team consists of highly qualified and regulated legal professionals who possess extensive knowledge and experience in dispute resolution. You can trust that your legal matter will be handled by specialist and experienced lawyers who provide the highest level of service to achieve the best result for your case.

Customer Satisfaction Guarantee

We are so confident in our ability that we give our clients a service level guarantee. If you are not happy with the service we provide on your case, you can request a 10% discount on our invoice(s) no questions asked.

1. Book Free Consultation

2. our lawyers will call you, 3. we will represent your best interests to success.

Schedule a Free Consultation

• Go Legal Services t/a Go Legal
• Longbow House
• 20 Chiswell St
• Financial Services
• Director & Shareholder Disputes

Phone Numbers

• (+44) 207 459 4037
• (+44) 777 071 0442

Email Address

Business Hours

• 24 hours 7 days a week availability

This website is operated by Go Legal Services Ltd. Go Legal is a trademark and trading name of Go Legal Services, a professional legal services company registered in England and Wales, company number 15206124. Its lawyers provide all reserved legal services through SRA-regulated solicitors’ firm, Spencer West. Go Legal is non-regulated with SRA Number: 8006057 and does not provide reserved activities. VAT Number: 460 0154 38.

• Legal & Regulatory
• Privacy & Cookies
• Terms of Use
• Free Consultation
• Go Legal Services Ltd. All rights reserved.

Resolving Payment Disputes: A Legal Guide for the UK Construction Sector

We are here to help you. Call us for your Free Consultation: 0207 459 4037

The Ultimate Guide to Construction Project Management: Legal Tips & Best Practices

The complete guide to litigation funding in england & wales, the essential guide to intellectual property protection in the uk, understanding defamation: a comprehensive guide, a comprehensive guide to preventing and resolving partnership disputes, navigating partnership disputes: a step-by-step guide, understanding your rights: a guide to financial services disputes in the uk, the essential guide to resolving financial services disputes in the uk, understanding professional negligence: an introductory guide, guide to starting a professional negligence claim, appealing hmrc decisions: your rights and procedures, a guide to alternative dispute resolution (adr) in hmrc disputes, best practices to minimise bad debts, how to start a debt claim, a guide to creditors' rights in insolvency proceedings, crypto recovery group: overview of cryptocurrency recovery& fraud, cryptocurrency tax disputes: navigating the grey areas, avoiding insolvency: early warning signs and remedial actions, navigating corporate insolvency: a step-by-step guide, preventing shareholder disputes: a proactive approach, the legal implications of deadlock in 50/50 owned companies.

What is the difference between an assignment and novation?

Sometimes we see clients getting confused between what an assignment is and what a novation is. This article answers that. Both are often used where one company wants another to step in and fulfill its role in a contract.

How does an assignment work?

In an assignment, the person assigning the contract to another person is called the “Assignor”. The person being assigned the contract is called the “Assignee”. It is the Assignee that receives the benefit of the contract. Some contracts cannot be assigned without the consent of the other party to the contract, and some contracts may expressly prohibit assignment. If there is no provision concerning assignment, then the general position is that the contract can be assigned to another. If the contract is assigned to the Assignee, they must perform their part to the contract. As such, the other party will usually want to check that the proposed Assignee has sufficient skill and finance to carry out the contract. Therefore, it is common for there to be an assignment provision in the contract that accounts for this, so that the other party can withhold consent if the proposed Assignee fails to meet those criteria.

It is important to note that although the Assignee is expected to perform the contract, they do not carry the burden of the contract. In other words, if the Assignee fails to perform their part of the contract, the Assignor remains liable. As a result, if the Assignee is insolvent then the other party can seek recourse from the Assignor or demand that they perform the contract. However, it may be that the Assignor is no longer able to meet a demand made under the assigned contract. Thus, it is best practice to perform due diligence on the proposed Assignee before the contract is assigned to them.

What about a novation?

In a novation, the new party, known as the “Novatee”, does not take over the existing contract. Rather, the Novatee enters into a new contract with the other party/continuing party. The original party that has exited the contract between them and the other party is called the “Novator”. Unlike an Assignor, the Novator is released from their obligations under that contract. As such, they do not carry the burden of the contract. It is the Novatee that carries the burden of the contract entered into subsequently. Consequently, if the Novatee fails to perform the contract, the continuing party cannot seek recourse from the Novator. Thus, a novation is of higher risk to the continuing party than an assignment.

In forming any contract, you should ensure that the contract does not allow the other side to novate the contract prior to obtaining your consent. Prior to entering into a novation, the continuing party should do due diligence on the proposed Novatee to certify that they are sufficiently capable of performing the contract.

Generally a good option is for a contract to be novated – it is then like the new party steps into the shoes of the old and there are fewer questions about who is doing what. However, there can be reasons why an assignment is better. If you have any questions about this then we would be happy to discuss.

This article is not a substitute for legal advice and you should contact your lawyer about your specific situation. Please feel free to contact Steven Moe at [email protected]

Christchurch CBD

PHONE: +64 3 348 8480 FAX: +64 3 348 6305

PHYSICAL ADDRESS: Level 1, 60 Cashel Street Christchurch 8013, New Zealand

POSTAL ADDRESS: PO Box 744 Christchurch, 8140, New Zealand

Christchurch

PHYSICAL ADDRESS: 1 Rimu Street, Riccarton, Christchurch 8041, New Zealand

POSTAL ADDRESS: PO Box 8020, Riccarton, Christchurch, 8440, New Zealand

PHONE:  +64 3 348 8480 FAX: +64 3 348 6305

PHYSICAL ADDRESS: Level 1, 80 Rolleston Drive , Rolleston, 7614, New Zealand

PHONE:  +64 3 755 8673 FAX: +64 3 755 8073

PHYSICAL ADDRESS: 26 Weld Street, Hokitika 7810, New Zealand

POSTAL ADDRESS: PO Box 44, Hokitika 7842, New Zealand

Parry Field Charitable Foundation

© Copyright – Parry Field Lawyers     |     Privacy Policy