Selecteer een pagina

The clause prohibiting the award of works or services is a valid clause that is fully enforceable and does not matter much. However, the clause prohibiting the attribution of payments is a more complex clause that influences important buying and selling decisions. Because the use of an alliance to avoid competing can be controversial, a handful of states, including California, have largely banned this type of treaty language. The legal enforcement of these agreements is the responsibility of each state, and many have sided with the employee in arbitration or litigation. The obligation not to compete must be reasonable and specific, with defined periods and coverage areas. If the agreement gives the company too much power over former employees or is ambiguous, state courts may declare it too broad and therefore unenforceable. In such a case, the employee is free to pursue any employment opportunity, including working for a direct competitor or starting a new business on his or her own. When trade agreements are concluded, the parties generally tend to focus on the most important business aspects, but do not pay attention to the anti-assignment provisions. It is therefore the primary responsibility of a corporate lawyer to study, analyze and analyze agreements in order to ensure the best for his clients. As you can see, this provision states that no assignment is permitted, with one exception: CMP argued that MTA was not authorized to enforce Alberta`s contract with CMP because Alberta was required under the anti-assignment clause to obtain CMP`s written consent before assigning its rights to MTA. MTA argued that the anti-assignment clause was intended to prevent assignments by third parties, not “estate assignments” such as the Alberta merger. Id.

at *11-12. In making this argument, it relied on a 1993 Chancery decision in which the then Vice-Chancellor, Jacobs, ruled that anti-emission clauses do not apply to mergers under certain conditions, unless mergers are expressly prohibited. Star Cellular Tel. Co.c. Baton Rouge CGSA., 1993 Del. Ch. LEXIS 158, at *25 (30 July 1993). Since the last sentence of the anti-assignment clause referred to “successors”, the MTA clearly did not intend to extend to mergers. For example, one of our clients came to the office indignant that his joint venturer with a major export deal that had excellent connections in Brazil instead opted for another company and assigned the deal to a party unknown to our client and without the business contacts that our client considered vital. When we looked at the handwritten agreement that our client had created in a restaurant in Sao Paolo, we found that there were no restrictions on the order.

Our client had not even taken this right into account when drafting the contract after a full working day. An assignment is generally permitted by law, unless there is an express prohibition on assignment in the underlying contract or lease. If assignments are permitted, the assignor does not need to consult with the other contracting party, but may assign the rights only at that time. However, an assignment cannot prejudice the obligations of the other party or reduce the chances that the other party will receive full performance. As a general rule, the assignor remains liable, unless the other contracting party has agreed otherwise. Courts will generally apply these types of comprehensive anti-sale clauses and conclude that the completion of a change of control transaction without consent constitutes a breach of contract. Therefore, in order to award contracts with full anti-divestiture provisions, the objective must obtain the consent of the counterparties for each of these contracts. Obtaining the consent of a third party in the context of M&A transactions can result in sensitive situations or costly delays. The target company may not want its customers, suppliers or others to know that they are going through a M&A event, while the acquirer may want to be assured that important contracts will remain in place.

In addition, some parties may use the leverage of their consent to renegotiate the terms of the contract or obtain concessions from the target company. Therefore, it is important for the parties to identify and address full anti-assignment clauses at an early stage – especially if the contracts to be acquired represent a large part of the value of a target business. As with many common terms, people are familiar with the term, but are often unaware or are not fully aware of what the terms imply. The concept of assignment of rights and obligations is one of those simple concepts with far-reaching implications in the contractual and commercial context, and the law significantly limits the validity and effect of the assignment in many cases. .