The uneasy case of tortious interference with a contractual prohibition of assignment


  • Dimitar Stoyanov Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”, Faculty of Law



pactum de non cedendo; contractual prohibition of assignment; tortious interference with contracts; inducement for breach of contract; UN Convention on Assignment of Receivables in International Trade


Tortious interference with an existing contractual relation, induced by a third party, is regarded as a valid ground to impose extra-contractual liability upon the inducer. The following article aims to compare the different types of legal approach to this type of tort throughout a variety of national legislations. As it turns out, its field of application is quite broad and comprises both individuals and legal entities irrespective of their mercantile capacity. This leads to the issue about the possibility to apply the tort in case of a contractual prohibition of assignment. Despite the fact that all the necessary pre-requisites of this tort, set forth by the legislator or clarified by case law, can be established whenever there is a breach of the clause prohibiting assignment, national and supranational legislative acts seem reluctant to impose a tortious liability upon the assignee. The main reason for this circumstance is the influence, exerted by the respective provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code, that have subsequently been adopted by the United Nations Convention on Assignment in International Trade (2001). A glimpse upon various provisions of European legislations, as well as some relevant case law, reveal the lack of a uniform approach within the EU. The article puts to critical discussion the influence upon economic relations of an eventual introduction of extra-contractual liability imposed upon the assignee for inducing the breach of an anti-assignment clause.


Bazinas, S., UNCITRAL’s Contribution to the Unification of Receivables Financing Law: The UN Convention on the Assignment of Receivables in International Trade, Uniform Law Review, vol. 7, 2002, Number 1;

Beale, H., Louise Gullifer, Sarah Paterson, A case for interfering with freedom of contract? An empirically informed study of bans on assignment, Journal of business law, Nº 3/2016, available at (accessed on 03.07.2023)

Bridge, M., The Nature of Assignment and Non-Assignment Clauses, Law Quarterly Review, 2015, available at – (accessed on 03.07.2023);

Dobbs, D., Tortious Interference with Contractual Relationships, Arkansas Law Review, 34. No. 3 (1980);

Fachetti Silvestre, G. (2021). The “contract theft” and third accomplice’s civil liability. Academia Letters, Article 2392. (accessed on 01.07.2023);

Gardos, P., Non-assignment clauses as obstacles to true sale securitisations. – Hungarian Journal of legal Studies, 2021, p. 9. -;

Huc, Th.,Traité théorique et pratique de la cession et de la transmission des créances, Tome Premier, Paris, 1891;

Kämper, L., L’incessibilité conventionnelle de la créance et la réforme de 2016. - In: Revue internationale de droit comparé. Vol. 70, N°4/2018, p. 957-;

Leslie, N., Smith, M., The Law of Assignment, Third Edition, Oxford University Press, 2018;

McBride, N., Bagshaw, R., Тоrt law, Sixth edition, Pearson Education Limited, 2018;

Palmer, V., A Comparative Study (from a Common Law Perspective) of the French Action for Wrongful Interference with Contract. – The American Journal of Comparative Law, Spring 1992, vol. 40, No. 2, -;

Schütze, E., Zession und Einheitsrecht, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, 2005;

Sigman, H., Smith, E., Toward Facilitating Cross-Border Secured Financing and Securitization: An Analysis of the United Nations Convention on the Assignment of Receivables in International Trade. - The Business Lawyer, Vol. 57, No. 2 (February 2002);

Spunda, A., Unwirksamkeit von Zessionsverboten durch das ZessRÄG, RWZ Aktuell, 7/2005;

Vogt, N., Kremslehner, Fl., Die UNCITRAL-Konvention über internationale Forderungsabtretungen und Bemerkungen aus österreichischer Sicht. – Ecolex, № 3/2000.




How to Cite

Stoyanov, D. . (2023). The uneasy case of tortious interference with a contractual prohibition of assignment. International Journal of Legal and Social Order, 3(1).