Architectural services agreements usually prohibit the assignment of the contract to a third party without the permission of the other party to the contract. The architect wants to know it will be paid by the project owner with whom it contracted. The project owner wants to know the services will be provided by the architect with whom it contracted. There is a question, however, as to whether these “anti-assignment” clauses also apply to post-performance assignment of claims for breach of contract.
A project owner settled a contractor claim for delay damages, in part by assigning the owner’s breach of contract claim against the project architect to the contractor. Was the contractor’s suit against the architect barred by the anti-assignment clause? Or, was the clause no longer applicable once performance was complete? After all, the clause did not expressly prohibit assignment of contract claims. A Pennsylvania court had to decide.
The other case in this issue involved a state department of transportation’s evaluation of disadvantaged business entity participation in bids. The disappointed bidder alleged the DOT had been inconsistent from project to project. A Connecticut court questioned whether this amounted to favoritism or exclusion on the immediate project.