Question

A seller contracted to manufacture 1,000 toasters for a buyer for a specified price. The contract contained a provision that clearly stated: “This contract may not be assigned, and any violation of this prohibition voids the contract.” After the contract was signed, the seller informed the buyer that the toasters would be manufactured by a competitor of the seller. Citing the non-assignment provision, the buyer claimed that it was no longer bound by the contract. Toasters manufactured by the competitor were of equal quality to toasters manufactured by the seller. Is the buyer bound by the contract?

A No, because "this contract may not be assigned" means that duties may not be delegated, and the seller delegated a duty.
B No, because the seller assigned a right despite the contractual prohibition.
C Yes, because even though the seller breached the contract, there are no damages since the competitor's toasters are of equal quality to the seller's toasters.
D Yes, because the non-assignment provision is not enforceable since public policy favors free assignment and delegation.

Answer 1

Answer:In this case the buyer is not bound by the contract because  "this contract may not be assigned" means that duties may not be delegated, and the seller delegated a duty.

Here, the agreement is particularly defined by a provision that clearly states that: “This contract may not be assigned, and any violation of this prohibition voids the contract.” Therefore, if after the contract is signed and thus the production of the commodity is overtaken by another manufacturer , then  the buyer's claim is right and he is not bound by the contract.

Therefore, the correct option is (A).