help on notice of assignment

[dizzyking]

could someone please point me in the right direction, I need to find out about notice of assignment, what are the rules, wording etc. any help would be greatly appreciated.

[dizzyking]

Re: help on notice of assignment

oops i think this is in the wrong place.

[miliitant]

Re: help on notice of assignment

google assignment under the law of property act 1925

[mystery1]

Re: help on notice of assignment

Stolen from a PT post.



20. Notice in writing.



In order that the assignee may obtain the benefit of the Law of Property Act 1925, express notice in writing of the assignment must be given to the debtor, trustee or other person1 from whom the assignor would have been entitled to claim the debt or the chose or thing in action2. Where there are joint debtors and covenantors, notice to one who is a bankrupt is unnecessary3. The notice need not be formal4, and need not be written with the intention that it should perform the function of giving notice5; but it must be given even though the debtor cannot read6. The assignment only operates under the Act as from the date of the notice7, that is, the date on which it is received by or on behalf of the debtor8. If the debt is released or extinguished by payment or otherwise before notice is given, there is no transfer under the Act9.
It has been held that if the date of the assignment is wrongly stated the notice is ineffectual10, though if no date is given at all the notice may be good11. It may also be ineffectual if it does not state the amount of the debt correctly12.
The Act prescribes no limit of time within which the notice must be given13, and a notice given after the death of the assignor14, or after the death of the assignee15, is effectual.
The Act does not prescribe that the notice must be given by any particular person16. Thus it may be given by the personal representatives of a deceased assignee, even though no notice has been given by him or by the original or any intermediate assignee17.
In the case of a company, notice to the manager at the works, though not communicated by him to the head office, may be sufficient18.
It is thought that where there have been two assignments of the same debt, of both of which notice has been given to the debtor, but the assignee under the second assignment, without having notice of the first, gave notice to the debtor of his assignment before notice was given of the first assignment, he will have priority19.
If a debtor has given a negotiable instrument, for example a cheque, in payment of the debt, a subsequent notice that the debt has been assigned may be disregarded by the debtor even if the creditor still holds the cheque20.







1 Amalgamated General Finance Co Ltd v CE Golding & Co Ltd [1964] 2 Lloyd's Rep 163 (no legal assignment because no notice to underwriters); Shaw v Applegate [1978] 1 All ER 123, [1977] 1 WLR 970, CA (equitable assignment of benefit of negative covenant became legal when notice given to covenantor). It seems that notice should be served on every person who would be a necessary party to a claim on the debt: see Josselson v Borst [1938] 1 KB 723 at 736, [1937] 3 All ER 722 at 727–728, CA, per Greer LJ, and at 740 and 732 per Slessor LJ. Notice should, accordingly, be given to all trustees: see para 53 post. In relation to a cause of action in tort see also Perry v Tendring District Council [1985] 1 EGLR 260; RL Polk & Co (Great Britain) Ltd v Edward Hill & Partners [1988] 1 EGLR 142.
2 Law of Property Act 1925 s 136(1). An assignment will be good in equity as between assignor and assignee without notice: Gorringe v Irwell India Rubber and Gutta Percha Works (1886) 34 ChD 128, CA. See further para 42 post. The suspensory character of the proviso in Gatoil Anstalt v Omennial Ltd [1980] 2 Lloyd's Rep 489 meant that the notice of assignment did not satisfy the requirements of the Law of Property Act 1925 s 136 (as amended).
3 Insolvency Act 1986 s 345(4); Josselson v Borst [1938] 1 KB 723, [1937] 3 All ER 722, CA.
4 Denney, Gasquet and Metcalfe v Conklin [1913] 3 KB 177.
5 Van Lynn Developments Ltd v Pelias Construction Co Ltd [1969] 1 QB 607, [1968] 3 All ER 824, CA.
6 Hockley and Papworth v Goldstein (1920) 90 LJKB 111 (where the debtor's inability to read was well known to all the parties, and clear oral notice was given but was ineffective).
7 Law of Property Act 1925 s 136(1).
8 Holt v Heatherfield Trust Ltd [1942] 2 KB 1, [1942] 1 All ER 404; Holwell Securities Ltd v Hughes [1973] 2 All ER 476, [1973] 1 WLR 757 (affd [1974] 1 All ER 161, [1974] 1 WLR 155, CA); and see para 21 post.
9 Lee v Magrath (1882) 10 LR Ir 313 at 319, 326, CA (where the transferor appointed the debtor her executor); Re Westerton, Public Trustee v Gray[1919] 2 Ch 104 (payment of interest to assignor of fund before notice of assignment of fund). Cf Jenkins v Jenkins [1928] 2 KB 501.
10 Stanley v English Fibres Industries Ltd (1899) 68 LJQB 839; WF Harrison & Co Ltd v Burke [1956] 2 All ER 169, [1956] 1 WLR 419, CA. It is not so in the case of an equitable assignment: Whittingstall v King (1882) 46 LT 520.
11 Van Lynn Developments Ltd v Pelias Construction Co Ltd [1969] 1 QB 607, [1968] 3 All ER 824, CA.
12 WF Harrison & Co Ltd v Burke [1956] 2 All ER 169, [1956] 1 WLR 419, CA, obiter per Denning LJ.
13 See Bateman v Hunt [1904] 2 KB 530 at 538, CA.
14 Walker v Bradford Old Bank (1884) 12 QBD 511; Re Westerton, Public Trustee v Gray [1919] 2 Ch 104.
15 Bateman v Hunt [1904] 2 KB 530, CA.
16 See Bateman v Hunt [1904] 2 KB 530 at 538, CA.
17 Bateman v Hunt [1904] 2 KB 530, CA (where the notice was given by the executor of a sub-assignee).
18 William Brandt's Sons & Co v Dunlop Rubber Co Ltd [1905] AC 454, HL (a decision on an equitable assignment).
19 See Marchant v Morton, Down & Co [1901] 2 KB 829.
20 Bence v Shearman [1898] 2 Ch 582, CA.

M1