ARTICLE
17 April 2014

Non-Assignment/Pledge Clauses Usually Without Effect Vis-À-Vis Third Parties

DB
De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek N.V.

Contributor

De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek is a leading international law firm, trusted by clients for over 150 years due to its deep engagement with their businesses and a clear understanding of their ambitions. While rooted in Dutch society, the firm offers global coverage through its network of top-tier law firms, ensuring seamless, tailored legal solutions. De Brauw’s independence enables it to choose the best partners while remaining a trusted, strategic advisor to clients worldwide.

The firm emphasizes long-term investment in both its client relationships and its people. De Brauw’s legal training institutes, De Brauwerij and The Brewery, cultivate diverse talent, preparing the next generation of top-tier lawyers through rigorous training and personal development. Senior leadership traditionally rises from within, maintaining the firm’s high standards and collaborative culture.

A recent Supreme Court ruling has put a practical end to the effectiveness of clauses in contracts prohibiting assignment or pledge of receivables.
Netherlands Insolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring

A recent Supreme Court ruling has put a practical end to the effectiveness – in relation to third parties – of clauses in contracts prohibiting assignment or pledge of receivables. The ruling means that if a debtor does not want a creditor to freely assign his position to a third party, the debtor will have to specifically provide in the contract that the clause should have effect vis-à-vis third parties.

We recently issued a Legal Alert about this ruling (in Dutch only).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More