e********e
发帖数: 6961 | 1 某教材里面有这么一段话：
“A clause prohibiting assignment of contractual rights generally does not
bar assignment, but merely gives the obligor the right to sue for damages.
However, if the contract provides that attempts to assign will be void, the
parties can bar assignment. Also, if the assignee has notice of the
nonassignment clause, an assignment will be ineffective.”
我理解contract虽然bar assignment但是assign contract right仍然不是void是为了
保护assignee的利益，但是为啥合同里面说到assignment will be void之后，
assignment就可以被bar了呢？如果原 |
y*****i
发帖数: 588 | 2
the
他说的是"attempts to assign"
如果原合同双方约定assignment void的情况assignee也
【在 e********e 的大作中提到】
: 某教材里面有这么一段话：
: “A clause prohibiting assignment of contractual rights generally does not
: bar assignment, but merely gives the obligor the right to sue for damages.
: However, if the contract provides that attempts to assign will be void, the
: parties can bar assignment. Also, if the assignee has notice of the
: nonassignment clause, an assignment will be ineffective.”
: 我理解contract虽然bar assignment但是assign contract right仍然不是void是为了
: 保护assignee的利益，但是为啥合同里面说到assignment will be void之后，
: assignment就可以被bar了呢？如果原
|
y*****i
发帖数: 588 | 3 写的不一样当然不一样啦，所以律师要好好看合同吗
the
【在 e********e 的大作中提到】
: 某教材里面有这么一段话：
: “A clause prohibiting assignment of contractual rights generally does not
: bar assignment, but merely gives the obligor the right to sue for damages.
: However, if the contract provides that attempts to assign will be void, the
: parties can bar assignment. Also, if the assignee has notice of the
: nonassignment clause, an assignment will be ineffective.”
: 我理解contract虽然bar assignment但是assign contract right仍然不是void是为了
: 保护assignee的利益，但是为啥合同里面说到assignment will be void之后，
: assignment就可以被bar了呢？如果原
|
e********e
发帖数: 6961 | 4 我就是想问为什么要有这样的区分呢，有什么underlying的principal呢？
【在 y*****i 的大作中提到】
: 写的不一样当然不一样啦，所以律师要好好看合同吗
:
: the
|
o***d
发帖数: 46 | 5 The second assignee should be protected if he does not know his oppoing
party in current transaction (assignor in the current transaction but
assignee for the first transaction) has no right to further assgin. If the
second assignee knew previous assginment's restriction but went ahead to
proceed the current transaction, he is wilfully infringing the first
assignor's right in the first transaction, therefore the current transaction
will be void. List a line of parties and think clearly each part |
h*****d
发帖数: 259 | 6 本来想进来学习一下法律，不过楼上这语法乱的~~不是说学法律的人英语都不错嘛？
transaction
【在 o***d 的大作中提到】
: The second assignee should be protected if he does not know his oppoing
: party in current transaction (assignor in the current transaction but
: assignee for the first transaction) has no right to further assgin. If the
: second assignee knew previous assginment's restriction but went ahead to
: proceed the current transaction, he is wilfully infringing the first
: assignor's right in the first transaction, therefore the current transaction
: will be void. List a line of parties and think clearly each part
|
n*****k
发帖数: 2801 | 7 你怎么知道他是学法律的
【在 h*****d 的大作中提到】
: 本来想进来学习一下法律，不过楼上这语法乱的~~不是说学法律的人英语都不错嘛？
:
: transaction
|
