facebook   linkedin

If the same right has been assigned by the same assignor to two or more successive assignees, the obligor is discharged by paying according to the order in which the notices were received.

 

COMMENT

 

1. Priority of first notice

 

This Article deals with the case where the same assignor assigns the same right to different assignees. Normally this should not happen, although in practice it may occur, whether the assignor does so consciously or inadvertently. Preference is then given to the assignee who was the first to give notice. The other assignees can only claim against the assignor under Article 9.1.15(c) below.

 

Illustration

 

On 5 February seller A assigns its right to payment from buyer X to bank B, and then on 20 February to bank C. C notifies the assignment on 21 February, and B does so only on 25 February. X is discharged by paying C, even though the right was assigned to C after it had been assigned to B.

 

Unlike the solution prevailing under certain jurisdictions, this Article does not take into consideration the actual or constructive knowledge the obligor may have of the assignment(s) in the absence of notice. This approach is motivated by the wish to encourage the giving of notice, thus ensuring a degree of certainty that is especially advisable in the context of international contracts.

 

2. No notice given

 

If no notice is given by any of the successive assignees the obligor will be discharged by paying the assignor (see Article 9.1.10(1)).

 

3. Notice without adequate proof

 

Notice by an assignee without there being adequate proof that the assignment has been made, may be ineffective under Article 9.1.12. 

We use cookies on this website. By using this site, You agree that we may store and access cookies on your device.