assignment of receivables practical law

Receivables finance: prohibiting restrictions on the assignment of receivables | Practical Law

Receivables finance: prohibiting restrictions on the assignment of receivables

Practical law uk practice note overview 2-613-0546  (approx. 11 pages).

• France (FR)
• Germany (DE)
• Netherlands

United Kingdom

• United States

The Business Contract Terms (Assignment of Receivables) Regulations 2018: still more to do?

The Business Contract Terms (Assignment of Receivables) Regulations 2018 (the " Regulations ") are now in force. The Regulations are intended to make it easier for small businesses to access receivables-based finance by making ineffective any prohibitions, conditions and restrictions on the assignment of receivables [1] arising under contracts for the supply of goods, services or intangible assets.

The Regulations have a somewhat chequered history. The Law Commission advocated legislation to limit the effectiveness of anti-assignment clauses in 2005, however, the proposal failed to gain momentum and lay dormant for more than a decade. Draft legislation finally appeared in 2017, but was withdrawn following criticism by the Loan Market Association and others. The final form of the Regulations addresses some of the criticisms, but adds complexity in what is already a complex area of the law.

The Effect of the Regulations

A term in a contract to which the Regulations apply is ineffective to the extent that it prohibits or imposes a condition or other restriction on the assignment of a receivable arising under that contract or another contract between the same parties. That does not necessarily mean that the term will be entirely void as a result: contractual prohibitions on assignment often do not distinguish between the right to performance of the contract and the right to be paid amounts arising under it. Prohibitions of this type will remain effective to prevent an assignment of the right to performance, even if they are ineffective to prevent the assignment of receivables arising under the contract.

The Regulations provide that a term which prevents an assignee from determining the validity or the value of the receivable or restricts its ability to enforce the receivable will be deemed to be a condition or other restriction on assignment. This, for example, includes provisions which prevent an assignee from obtaining particulars and evidence of any potential defence or set-off by a party to the contract. Therefore, the Regulations permit disclosure of matters which might otherwise be caught by confidentiality provisions in the underlying contract.

When do the Regulations apply?

Subject to specified exceptions, the Regulations apply to any contract entered into on or after 31 December 2018.

Certain types of contract are excluded from the Regulations. For example, the Regulations do not apply :

• to contracts for certain prescribed financial services or to other specific types of contract, including those in relation to real estate, certain derivatives, certain project finance and energy agreements and operating leases.
• to contracts entered into in connection with the acquisition, disposal or transfer of an ownership interest in all or part of a business, firm or undertaking, provided the relevant contract includes a statement to that effect. The need for such a statement applies even where the purpose of the contract is obvious on its face.
• where one or more of the parties is a consumer, or where none of the parties has entered into the contract in the course of carrying on a business in the UK.

The Regulations do not apply if the supplier is a "large enterprise" or a "special purpose vehicle" (the " SME Test ") at the time of the assignment. For this purpose, a special purpose vehicle is a firm that carries out a primary purpose in relation to the holding of assets (except trading stock) or financing commercial transactions, which in either case involves it incurring a liability of £10m or more.

The question of whether a limited company is a "large enterprise" depends in part on turnover, balance sheet total and number of employees assessed by reference the most recent annual accounts filed by the company or its parent prior to the assignment. Therefore, at the time the supplier and the debtor enter into a contract, they will not necessarily know whether a contractual prohibition on the assignment of receivables will be effective.

The definition of a "large enterprise" may be difficult to apply in some circumstances and to some entities. For example, the Regulations imply that limited partnerships are included in scope and some commentators argue that in this situation it would be the general partner entity which would be assessed under the SME Test, however, this is not expressly provided for by the Regulations.

If another governing law is imposed by a party wholly or mainly for the purpose of enabling it to evade the operation of the Regulations, the Regulations state that they will nevertheless have effect. Aside from the practical difficulty in determining whether the choice of law was imposed for this purpose, the effect of this provision is not entirely clear. Under Rome I, the law governing an assigned claim determines its assignability and the relationship between the assignee and the debtor [2] . Therefore, the fundamental question of whether the debtor should pay the supplier or the assignee remains determined by the governing law of the contract, but subject it seems (at least as far as the English courts are concerned) to the mandatory provisions of the Regulations.

The Regulations only affect prohibitions, restrictions and conditions on assignment contained in the contract under which the receivable arises or another contract between the same parties. For example, they would not restrict the effectiveness of a negative pledge or a restriction on the disposal of receivables contained in a financing document with a third party lender.

The term "assignment" is not defined in the Regulations and, assuming it has its normal legal meaning, does not include the creation of a charge or trust. Therefore, it appears that the Regulations do not apply to the creation of a charge or a trust.

What if the Regulations do not apply?

As a result of the SME Test and the exclusion of certain types of contracts, there will be many situations in which the Regulations are not relevant to the assignment of a receivable. Where the Regulations do not apply, the current law recognises the effectiveness of contractual prohibitions on the assignment of receivables [3] . However, case law suggests that a prohibition on assignment will not normally be construed as preventing the creation of a trust. Receivables purchase agreements will therefore often provide for the supplier to hold the receivable and/or its proceeds on trust for the assignee to the extent that the assignment is ineffective. In response, some debtors include specific prohibitions on the creation of trusts over receivables in their contracts. However, assignees will try to circumvent the practical effect of even the most widely drafted prohibition by taking a power of attorney enabling them to bring an action against the debtor in the name of the supplier.

The law is still developing in response to this escalating arms race between assignees and debtors. In part this is due to an inevitable tension between the interest of the assignee in having its proprietary interest in the receivable recognised and the interest of the debtor in choosing whether it deals with anyone other than its original contractual counterparty.

This has led some to argue that the common law should recognise all assignments of receivables notwithstanding prohibitions on assignment, at least as between the assignor and the assignee. [4] Arguably, this approach would balance the legitimate interests of all parties.

Still more to do?

Where they apply, the Regulations will make it easier for SMEs to assign their receivables and to raise finance. However, the Regulations do not mean that assignees can ignore the terms of the underlying contractual arrangements between suppliers and debtors; for one thing any existing rights of set-off will continue to bind the assignee [5] . Also, because the Regulations do not apply to contracts entered into before 31 December 2018, prohibitions on assignment will continue to apply to many receivables owed to SME suppliers for a while yet.

Assessing whether a supplier is an SME involves reviewing the most recent relevant annual accounts and the status of the supplier in this respect may change throughout the term of a contract. There are also various types of contract to which the Regulations do not apply and, in some cases, applying those exceptions is not straightforward. The Regulations add an additional layer of complexity to the law.

In practice, the question that assignees ask their lawyers is very simple: what action can they take to recover? The Regulations may enable the answer to be more positive, but they also make it more nuanced. There is more work for legislation or precedent to do to simplify the law in this area.

[1] "Receivable" is defined in broad terms as a right (whether or not earned by performance) to be paid any amount under a contract for the supply of goods, services or intangible assets.

[2] Regulation (EC) No 593/2008: Article 14(2), Rome I

[3] Linden Gardens Trust Ltd v Lenesta Sludge Disposals Ltd [1994] 1 AC 85

[4] See in particular Professor Roy Goode's article " Contractual Prohibitions Against Assignment " [2009] LMCLQ 300 cited by approval by Lady Justice Gloster in First Abu Dhabi Bank PJSC and BP Oil International Limited [2018] EWCA Civ 14

[5] In recovery situations, set-off and disputes in relation to liability are often more significant issues for the debtor from a commercial perspective than the question of whether a prohibition on assignment is legally effective.

Sign up to our email digest

• Search Search Please fill out this field.
• Corporate Finance
• Corporate Debt

Assignment of Accounts Receivable: Meaning, Considerations

Adam Hayes, Ph.D., CFA, is a financial writer with 15+ years Wall Street experience as a derivatives trader. Besides his extensive derivative trading expertise, Adam is an expert in economics and behavioral finance. Adam received his master's in economics from The New School for Social Research and his Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in sociology. He is a CFA charterholder as well as holding FINRA Series 7, 55 & 63 licenses. He currently researches and teaches economic sociology and the social studies of finance at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.

Charlene Rhinehart is a CPA , CFE, chair of an Illinois CPA Society committee, and has a degree in accounting and finance from DePaul University.

Investopedia / Jiaqi Zhou

What Is Assignment of Accounts Receivable?

Assignment of accounts receivable is a lending agreement whereby the borrower assigns accounts receivable to the lending institution. In exchange for this assignment of accounts receivable, the borrower receives a loan for a percentage, which could be as high as 100%, of the accounts receivable.

The borrower pays interest, a service charge on the loan, and the assigned receivables serve as collateral. If the borrower fails to repay the loan, the agreement allows the lender to collect the assigned receivables.

Key Takeaways

• Assignment of accounts receivable is a method of debt financing whereby the lender takes over the borrowing company's receivables.
• This form of alternative financing is often seen as less desirable, as it can be quite costly to the borrower, with APRs as high as 100% annualized.
• Usually, new and rapidly growing firms or those that cannot find traditional financing elsewhere will seek this method.
• Accounts receivable are considered to be liquid assets.
• If a borrower doesn't repay their loan, the assignment of accounts agreement protects the lender.

Understanding Assignment of Accounts Receivable

With an assignment of accounts receivable, the borrower retains ownership of the assigned receivables and therefore retains the risk that some accounts receivable will not be repaid. In this case, the lending institution may demand payment directly from the borrower. This arrangement is called an "assignment of accounts receivable with recourse." Assignment of accounts receivable should not be confused with pledging or with accounts receivable financing .

An assignment of accounts receivable has been typically more expensive than other forms of borrowing. Often, companies that use it are unable to obtain less costly options. Sometimes it is used by companies that are growing rapidly or otherwise have too little cash on hand to fund their operations.

New startups in Fintech, like C2FO, are addressing this segment of the supply chain finance by creating marketplaces for account receivables. Liduidx is another Fintech company providing solutions through digitization of this process and connecting funding providers.

Financiers may be willing to structure accounts receivable financing agreements in different ways with various potential provisions.​

Special Considerations

Accounts receivable (AR, or simply "receivables") refer to a firm's outstanding balances of invoices billed to customers that haven't been paid yet. Accounts receivables are reported on a company’s balance sheet as an asset, usually a current asset with invoice payments due within one year.

Accounts receivable are considered to be a relatively liquid asset . As such, these funds due are of potential value for lenders and financiers. Some companies may see their accounts receivable as a burden since they are expected to be paid but require collections and cannot be converted to cash immediately. As such, accounts receivable assignment may be attractive to certain firms.

The process of assignment of accounts receivable, along with other forms of financing, is often known as factoring, and the companies that focus on it may be called factoring companies. Factoring companies will usually focus substantially on the business of accounts receivable financing, but factoring, in general, a product of any financier.

• Terms of Service
• Editorial Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Your Privacy Choices

• Client login

How can we help you?

Prohibitions and restrictions on the assignment of receivables - what employers and main contractors need to know.

11 March 2019

By John Garland

The Business Contract Terms (Assignment of Receivables) Regulations 2018 (the Regulations) came into force on 31 December 2018. The Regulations apply to any term in a contract entered into on or after this date; including any contracts which are novated. A receivable is a right to be paid under a contract for the supply of goods, services or intangible assets.

The purpose of the Regulations is to void any term in a contract which prohibits or imposes a condition or other restriction on the assignment of a receivable arising under any contract. The imposition of a condition or other restriction includes any term which prevents the assignee from determining the validity or value of the receivable or their ability to enforce the receivable.

There are specific exemptions to the Regulations, the first of which is where the supplier is a large enterprise or a special purpose vehicle. A large enterprise is, broadly speaking, a company which is not an individual, an unregistered partnership, an incorporated company or limited liability partnership which qualifies as a small or medium sized company under the Companies Act 2006. A medium sized company is one that satisfies 2 or more of the following criteria:

•  Turnover is not more than £25.9m
•  Balance sheet total is not more than £12.9m
•  Number of employees not more than 250

The second exclusion to the Regulations is various types of contracts, such as prescribed financial services, interests in land and contracts for the sale of shares in a business. The reference to land contracts being excluded is very interesting, and indicates that the Regulations are unlikely to apply to development agreements being procured as turnkey deals, which may be of particular interest to local authorities and registered providers.

The explanatory note to the Regulations states that a debtor's existing contractual rights of set off are not fettered by the Regulations. This upholds the long standing legal principle that existing rights are not extinguished by an assignment and that the assignee cannot be placed in a better position than the assignor would have been in.

It has become increasingly common for Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) to, where permitted, assign the receivables payments to a finance company for immediate payment, subject to a reduction in the percentage of the receivables owed. This is sometimes referred to as factoring or invoice discounting. Whilst uncommon in the construction industry, there are niche providers who do offer this solution in this market.

The Regulations have been implemented in an attempt to combat poor payment practices within businesses, to improve cash flow for SMEs and to prevent large companies prohibiting factoring or invoice discounting by SMEs as a way of improving cash flow.

This is of particular importance to the construction industry, where it is extremely common for contracting parties to either impose an absolute prohibition on assignment on all or part of a contract, or to impose restrictions on assignment.

Employers and main contractors will typically wish to restrict assignments so that they know the entity that they are dealing with at all times, and have control over which entity that might change to on any assignment. A common example of a restriction on assignment is requiring the written consent of the employer/main contractor prior to any assignment being effected.

A primary issue of the implementation of the Regulations on parties is the fettering of their rights to freely negotiate their own contractual terms. This raises the further question of whether or not the current drafting of assignment clauses needs to be amended to reflect the changes in the Regulations.

The Regulations provide that a term in a contract '...has no effect to the extent that...' it prohibits or imposes a condition or other restriction. As a result of the drafting, our view is that existing assignment clauses need not be amended, as where the Regulations are applicable the prohibition or restriction on assignment in respect of the receivables will not have effect, whereas the prohibition or restriction will have effect in respect of non-receivables.

However, to avoid any potential arguments over the construction of a clause which prohibits assignment of any part of a contract, it may be prudent for businesses who deal with SMEs on a regular basis to expressly carve out receivables from any prohibition or restriction on assignment clauses in your standard contracts or terms and conditions.

Ultimately, if your supply chain comprises a large number of SMEs, there will be nothing your organisation can do to prevent factoring arrangements being put in place. Therefore quality assurance and management may need to be implemented for works which comprise of interim payments.

In particular, queries on invoices or the value of the works actually completed should be challenged at the earliest opportunity. This will ensure that you will prevent over payments to the factoring company, and prevent being required to go through a lengthy process to reclaim any monies overpaid.

This article is taken from Building Interest - Winter 2019 .

John Garland

Senior Associate

Related Sectors

Related services.

English law assignments of part of a debt: Practical considerations

United Kingdom |  Publication |  December 2019

Enforcing partially assigned debts against the debtor

The increase of supply chain finance has driven an increased interest in parties considering the sale and purchase of parts of debts (as opposed to purchasing debts in their entirety).

While under English law part of a debt can be assigned, there is a general requirement that the relevant assignee joins the assignor to any proceedings against the debtor, which potentially impedes the assignee’s ability to enforce against the debtor efficiently.

This note considers whether this requirement may be dispensed with in certain circumstances.

Can you assign part of a debt?

Under English law, the beneficial ownership of part of a debt can be assigned, although the legal ownership cannot. 1  This means that an assignment of part of a debt will take effect as an equitable assignment instead of a legal assignment.

Joining the assignor to proceedings against the debtor

While both equitable and legal assignments are capable of removing the assigned asset from the insolvency estate of the assignor, failure to obtain a legal assignment and relying solely on an equitable assignment may require the assignee to join the relevant assignor as a party to any enforcement action against the debtor.

An assignee of part of a debt will want to be able to sue a debtor in its own name and, if it is required to join the assignor to proceedings against the debtor, this could add additional costs and delays if the assignor was unwilling to cooperate. 2

Kapoor v National Westminster Bank plc

English courts have, in recent years, been pragmatic in allowing an assignee of part of a debt to sue the debtor in its own name without the cooperation of the assignor.

In Charnesh Kapoor v National Westminster Bank plc, Kian Seng Tan 3 the court held that an equitable assignee of part of a debt is entitled in its own right and name to bring proceedings for the assigned debt. The equitable assignee will usually be required to join the assignor to the proceedings in order to ensure that the debtor is not exposed to double recovery, but the requirement is a procedural one that can be dispensed with by the court.

The reason for the requirement that an equitable assignee joins the assignor to proceedings against the debtor is not that the assignee has no right which it can assert independently, but that the debtor ought to be protected from the possibility of any further claim by the assignor who should therefore be bound by the judgment.

Application of Kapoor

It is a common feature of supply chain finance transactions that the assigned debt (or part of the debt) is supported by an independent payment undertaking. Such independent payment undertaking makes it clear that the debtor cannot raise defences and that it is required to pay the relevant debt (or part of a debt) without set-off or counterclaim. In respect of an assignee of part of an independent payment undertaking which is not disputed and has itself been equitably assigned to the assignee, we believe that there are good grounds that an English court would accept that the assignee is allowed to pursue an action directly against the debtor without needing the assignor to be joined, as this is likely to be a matter of procedure only, not substance.

This analysis is limited to English law and does not consider the laws of any other jurisdiction.

Notwithstanding the helpful clarifications summarised in Kapoor, as many receivables financing transactions involve a number of cross-border elements, assignees should continue to consider the effect of the laws (and, potentially court procedures) of any other relevant jurisdictions on the assignment of part of a debt even where the sale of such partial debt is completed under English law.

Legal title cannot be assigned in respect of part of a debt. A partial assignment would not satisfy the requirements for a legal assignment of section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925.

If an assignor does not consent to being joined as a plaintiff in proceedings against the debtor it would be necessary to join the assignor as a co-defendant. However, where an assignor has gone into administration or liquidation, there may be a statutory prohibition on joining such assignor as a co-defendant (without the leave of the court or in certain circumstances the consent of the administrator).

[2011] EWCA Civ 1083

• Financial institutions

Recent publications

Publication

SEC’s crypto enforcement authority sustained over Coinbase’s vigorous challenges

In a strong victory for the US SEC in its closely-watched enforcement action against Coinbase over its crypto-assets activities, a New York federal court on March 27, 2024.

United States | March 28, 2024

RIS – restoring consumer trust by shrinking the investment universe?

On 24 May 2023, the European Commission (Commission) published its Retail Investment Strategy (RIS), a legislative package intended to empower retail investors to take more informed investment decisions that would better correspond to their investment needs and objectives.

Global | March 28, 2024

Pensions Regulator shares findings from value for members compliance exercise

Under the Occupational Pension Schemes (Administration, Investment, Charges and Governance) (Amendment) Regulations 2021, which came into force in October 2021, trustees of DC schemes with total assets of less than £100 million must carry out a value for members (VfM) assessment.

United Kingdom | March 27, 2024

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .

© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023

• Canada (English)
• Canada (Français)
• United States
• Deutschland (Deutsch)
• Germany (English)
• The Netherlands
• Türkiye
• United Kingdom
• South Africa
• Hong Kong SAR
• Marshall Islands
• Nordic region

Our Insights

Assignment of Accounts Receivable – Trap for the Unwary

By  Steven A. Jacobson

Most businesses are familiar with the mechanics of an assignment of accounts receivable. A party seeking capital assigns its accounts receivable to a financing or factoring company that advances that party a stipulated percentage of the face amount of the receivables.

The factoring company, in turn, sends a notice of assignment of accounts receivable to the party obligated to pay the factoring company’s assignee, i.e. the account debtor. While fairly straightforward, this three-party arrangement has one potential trap for account debtors.

Most account debtors know that once they receive a notice of assignment of accounts receivable, they are obligated to commence payments to the factoring company. Continued payments to the assignee do not relieve the account debtor from its obligation to pay the factoring company.

It is not uncommon for a notice of assignment of accounts receivable to contain seemingly innocuous and boilerplate language along the following lines:

Please make the proper notations on your ledger and acknowledge this letter and that invoices are not subject to any claims or defenses you may have against the assignee.

Typically, the notice of assignment of accounts receivable is directed to an accounting department and is signed, acknowledged and returned to the factoring company without consideration of the waiver of defenses languages.

Even though a party may have a valid defense to payment to its assignee, it still must pay the face amount of the receivable to the factoring company if it has signed a waiver. In many cases, this will result in a party paying twice – once to the factoring company and once to have, for example, shoddy workmanship repaired or defective goods replaced. Despite the harsh result caused by an oftentimes inadvertent waiver agreement, the Uniform Commercial Code validates these provisions with limited exceptions. Accordingly, some procedures should be put in place to require a review of any notice of assignment of accounts receivable to make sure that an account debtor preserves its rights and defenses.

• Announcement

• Trade Finance
• Letters of Credit
• Trade Insurance & Risk
• Shipping & Logistics
• Sustainable Trade Finance
• Incoterms® Rules 2020
• Research & Data
• Conferences
• Purchase Order Finance
• Stock Finance
• Structured Commodity Finance
• Receivables Finance
• Supply Chain Finance
• Bonds and Guarantees
• Find Finance Products
• Get Trade Finance

• Incoterms® 2020
• Letters of Credit (LCs)

Receivables Finance And The Assignment Of Receivables

Tfg legal trade finance hub, receivables finance and the assignment of receivables.

A receivable represents money that is owed to a company and is expected to be paid in the future. Receivables finance, also known as accounts receivable financing, is a form of asset-based financing where a company leverages its outstanding receivables as collateral to secure short-term loans and obtain financing.

In case of default, the lender has a right to collect associated receivables from the company’s debtors. In brief, it is the process by which a company raises cash against its own book’s debts.

The company actually receives an amount equal to a reduced value of the pledged receivables, the age of the receivables impacting the amount of financing received. The company can get up to 90% of the amount of its receivables advanced.

This form of financing assists companies in unlocking funds that would otherwise remain tied up in accounts receivable, providing them with access to capital that is not immediately realised from outstanding debts.

FIG. 1: Accounts receivable financing operates by leveraging a company’s receivables to obtain financing.  Source: https://fhcadvisory.com/images/account-receivable-financing.jpg

Restrictions on the assignment of receivables – New legislation

Invoice  discounting  products under which a company assigns its receivables have been used by small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to raise capital. However, such products depend on the related receivables to be assignable at first.

Businesses have faced provisions that ban or restrict the assignment of receivables in commercial contracts by imposing a condition or other restrictions, which prevents them from being able to use their receivables to raise funds.

In 2015, the UK Government enacted the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act (SBEEA) by which raising finance on receivables is facilitated. Pursuant to this Act, regulations can be made to invalidate restrictions on the assignment of receivables in certain types of contract.

In other words, in certain circumstances, clauses which prevent assignment of a receivable in a contract between businesses is unenforceable. Especially, in its section 1(1), the Act provides that the authorised authority can, by regulations “make provision for the purpose of securing that any non-assignment of receivables term of a relevant contract:

• has no effect;
• has no effect in relation to persons of a prescribed description;
• has effect in relation to persons of a prescribed description only for such purposes as may be prescribed.”

The underlying aim is to enable SMEs to use their receivables as financing to raise capital, through the possibility of assigning such receivables to another entity.

The aforementioned regulations, which allow invalidations of such restrictions on the assignment of receivables, are contained in the Business Contract Terms (Assignment of Receivables) Regulations 2018, which will apply to any term in a contract entered into force on or after 31 December 2018.

By virtue of its section 2(1) “Subject to regulations 3 and 4, a term in a contract has no effect to the extent that it prohibits or imposes a condition, or other restriction, on the assignment of a receivable arising under that contract or any other contract between the same parties.”

Such regulations apply to contracts for the supply of goods, services or intangible assets under which the supplier is entitled to be paid money. However, there are several exclusions to this rule.

In section 3, an exception exists where the supplier is a large enterprise or a special purpose vehicle (SPV). In section 4, there are listed exclusions for various contracts such as “for, or entered into in connection with, prescribed financial services”, contracts “where one or more of the parties to the contract is acting for purposes which are outside a trade, business or profession” or contracts “where none of the parties to the contract has entered into it in the course of carrying on a business in the United Kingdom”. Also, specific exclusions relate to contracts in energy, land, share purchase and business purchase.

Effects of the 2018 Regulations

As mentioned above, any contract terms that prevent, set conditions for, or place restrictions on transferring a receivable are considered invalid and cannot be legally enforced.

In light of this, the assignment of the right to be paid under a contract for the supply of goods (receivables) cannot be restricted or prohibited. However, parties are not prevented from restricting other contracts rights.

Non-assignment clauses can have varying forms. Such clauses are covered by the regulations when terms prevent the assignee from determining the validity or value of the receivable or their ability to enforce it.

Overall, these legislations have had an important impact for businesses involved in the financing of receivables, by facilitating such processes for SMEs.

Digital platforms and fintech solutions: The assignment of receivables has been significantly impacted by the digitisation of financial services. Fintech platforms and online marketplaces have been developed to make the financing and assignment of receivables easier.

These platforms employ tech to assess debtor creditworthiness and provide efficient investor and seller matching, including data analytics and artificial intelligence. They provide businesses more autonomy, transparency, and access to a wider range of possible investors.

Securitisation is an essential part of receivables financing. Asset-backed securities (ABS), a type of financial instrument made up of receivables, are then sold to investors.

Businesses are able to turn their receivables into fast cash by transferring the credit risk and cash flow rights to investors. Investors gain from diversification and potentially greater yields through securitisation, while businesses profit from increased liquidity and risk-reduction capabilities.

References:

https://www.tradefinanceglobal.com/finance-products/accounts-receivables-finance/  – 28/10/2018

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/26/section/1/enacted  – 28/10/2018

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2018/9780111171080  – 28/10/2018

https://www.bis.org/publ/bppdf/bispap117.pdf  – Accessed 14/06/2023

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/asset-backedsecurity.asp  – Accessed 14/06/2023

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2008/09/pdf/basics.pdf  – Accessed 14/06/2023

International Trade Law

1 | Introduction to International Trade Law 2 | Legal Trade Finance 3 | Standard Legal Charges 4 | Borrowing Base Facilities 5 | Governing law in trade finance transactions 6 | SPV Financing 7 | Guarantees and Indemnities 8 | Taking security over assets 9 | Receivables finance and the assignment of receivables 10 | Force Majeure 11 | Arbitration 12 | Master Participation Agreements 13 | Digital Negotiable Instruments 14 | Generative AI in Trade Law

Access trade, receivables and supply chain finance

Contact the trade team, speak to our trade finance team, want to learn more about trade finance download our free guides.

Learn more about Legal Structures in Trade Finance

Digital Negotiable Instruments

Electronic Signatures

Force Majeure

Master Risk Participation Agreements In Trade Finance

What is a Creditor?

What is a debtor (debitor).

About the Author

Trade Finance Global (TFG) assists companies with raising debt finance. While we can access many traditional forms of finance, we specialise in alternative finance and complex funding solutions related to international trade. We help companies to raise finance in ways that is sometimes out of reach for mainstream lenders.

• Practical Law

In taking security over all the receivables owing to a company from its debtors would you use an assignment of receivables or a charge over book debts?

Practical law resource id a-009-3320  (approx. 4 pages).

• Security and Quasi Security

• International

discover what we're about

GET STARTED

Moments that Matter

Advice and information for key life moments

Business Journey

We're here to support your business, from start-up to sale

3 November 2017

back to news overview

Assignment of Receivables

The draft Business Contract Terms (Assignment of Receivables) Regulations 2017 (the “ Draft Regulations ”) are currently before Parliament. If approved, these would contain provisions to nullify contract terms which attempt to restrict the ability of a party to assign a receivable.

In December 2014, the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS) consulted on an earlier version of the Draft Regulations. These earlier regulations contained a provision that allowed a party to rely on a confidentiality clause to prevent assignment of a receivable. This was included in the event that a debtor is unwilling for a receivable to be assigned because the disclosure of the debt to a third party compromises the debtor’s confidentiality. In August 2015, BIS published a response to the consultation.

Businesses often have to wait for a considerable length of time to be paid, which can cause cash flow issues. As a way of raising finance, a business may choose to assign an unpaid invoice to a third party, such as an invoice finance provider. This works by the finance provider lending the money to the business on the basis that the invoice is assigned to the finance provider. The finance provider will then pursue the debtor for the unpaid amount which will cover the earlier loans to the business.

Most contracts contain boilerplate provisions preventing the assignment of any rights under the contract unless the other party consents. A receivable is a right to be paid and a boilerplate non-assignment clause is broad enough to prevent invoices from being assigned.

Certain contracts are excluded from these rules. These include contracts for: an interest in land; for financial services; consumers where one or more of the parties is acting for purposes which are outside a trade, business or profession; for national security; and for certain energy and petroleum contracts.

Noticeably, the Draft Regulations do not include the confidentiality clause that was included in the earlier version.

Controversially, “assignment” is not defined. It is clear that this law would apply to outright assignments of receivables, but it is unclear the extent which it will apply to security interests. On the face of it, the new law will extend to security assignments but not charges or trusts. This may have the result that the parties cannot prevent a security assignment but can prevent a lesser interest such as a charge.

One of the reasons why restrictions on assignment are included in contracts is to protect the payer from having to pay more to an assignee than it would have to pay to the assignor. However, there is nothing in the Draft Regulations to protect the payer. It can only rely on its rights under the general law, which are extensive but not as good as an effective prohibition on assignment.

If approved, the Draft Regulations will not only apply to small companies. It will also read so that it covers all contracts, including those in existence at the time the new law comes into effect, which is expected to be in November or December 2017.

Share this article on social media

About the Author

Tim littler, senior legal counsel.

Tim Littler is a Cheltenham solicitor , specialising in banking and finance .

Want news direct to you?

In-House with You

• Covid-19 Hub
• Media Centre
• Newsletter Archive
• Publications
• Video library

• Training Contracts
• Vacation Scheme Placements

ALSO FROM HCR LAW

• Child and Parent Law
• Human Resources from Eagle HR
• Medical Accident Group
• Notarial Services
• Wills At Work

Sign up for news

HCR Legal LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA number 596261). Registered in England number OC382982

Harrison Clark Rickerbys Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA number 520892). Registered in England number 7033248

HCR Legal LLP, 5 Deansway, Worcester, WR1 2JG

Detailed role titles | How to complain | Accessibility | Covid Risk Assessment | Covid Risk Assessment (Wales) | Covid Visitor Guidelines | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Pricing Policy | Solicitors Regulation Authority | Modern Slavery Statement | Gender Pay Gap Report | Our Commitment to Net-Zero

© 2024 HCR Legal LLP

Got a question?

Send us an email.

• What is your name *
• Contact details *
• Which office is most convenient? * Most convenient office? Birmingham Cambridge Cardiff Central England Cheltenham Hereford London Thames Valley Worcester Wye Valley

Stay up to date

With our recent news.

• Email Address *
• Thames Valley
• Central England
• Banking and Finance
• Licensing, Regulatory and Tax
• Commercial, IP and IT
• Real Estate
• Relationships & Family Law
• Dispute Resolution
• Restructuring & Insolvency
• Employment & Immigration
• Private Client
• Ready For The Future (Our client insights newsletter)
• Defence & Security
• Agriculture & Rural Affairs
• Finance and Financial Services
• Construction & Engineering
• Health & Social Care
• Consent * I've read and agreed to the terms and conditions of the privacy policy *

I've read and agreed to the terms and conditions of the privacy policy

• Our People >
• For Your Business >
• International >
• Contact Us >

Service Teams

Walker Morris / Insights / Receivables Finance: the prohibition on assignment is now in force

• GCs & In-house
• International
• Diversity & Inclusion
• The Environment
• Wider Society

Our Clients

• Banks & Alternative Lenders
• Commercial Developers
• Energy, Waste & Infrastructure Companies
• Food & Drink Companies
• Manufacturing Companies
• Private Equity
• Residential Builders & Operators
• Retail & Leisure Providers
• illuminate – For GCs and In-house
• Factory of the Future
• Digital transformation in business
• Building Safety Act 2022
• Environmental law in practice
• International Alliances
• Inward Investment
• Newsletters
• Company News
• Sectors (Our clients) Banks & Alternative Lenders Commercial Developers Energy, Waste & Infrastructure companies Food & Drink Companies Logistics Manufacturing Companies Private Equity Residential Builders & Operators Retailers & Leisure Providers
• Services Banking & Finance Block Management Business Immigration City & Estates Commercial Competition Construction & Engineering Consumer Finance Corporate Dispute Resolution Dispute Resolution>Real Estate Litigation Employment & Immigration Environment Finance Dispute Resolution Housing Management & Litigation HR Infrastructure & Energy Intellectual Property, Trade Marks & Designs International International Trade Living Logistics Net Zero Pensions Planning & Environment Private Equity Public Sector Real Estate Regulatory & Compliance Restructuring & Insolvency Retail Sports Law Supply Chain Tax Technology & Digital Uncategorized
• Reset Search
• View all services

Receivables Finance: the prohibition on assignment is now in force

18th January 2019

The Business Contract Terms (Assignment of Receivables) Regulations 2018 came into force on 31 December 2018 meaning that parties to a contract in the UK may no longer be able to prohibit the assignment of receivables arising in respect of supplies made under it, even if it is a long term supply contract providing for multiple deliveries.

As we reported in December 2017 , draft regulations were laid before Parliament in September of that year which proposed to make any term in a business contract that prohibited or restricted the assignment of receivables automatically ineffective. Those draft regulations were subsequently withdrawn amid concerns that they would create uncertainty in the finance markets.

The main areas of concern were that:

• the legislation appeared to be retrospective therefore catching contracts that were already in place;
• the types of assignment which fell within the regulations were not described sufficiently well enough to create certainty; and
• there was no protection for the debtor who may have stipulated for a non-assignment clause in the expectation that its rights of set off would be preserved.

However, the government has since revisited the legislation and on 24 November 2018 the Business Contract Terms (Assignment of Receivables) Regulations 2018 (the Regulations ) came into force. The Regulations apply to contracts (with a few exceptions described below) created after 31 December 2018 and mean that parties will no longer be able to prohibit the assignment of receivables in the UK. The Regulations make it clear that the prohibition is not retrospective and so the Regulations only apply to new contracts. In effect, this means that one party to a contract cannot prevent the other party from choosing who should receive payments under a contract for the supply of goods, services or intangible assets.

The Regulations also render unenforceable any terms which prevent a person who has been assigned the receivable from being able to enforce the contract, or determine its validity or value (for example by preventing the disclosure of the information required to commence court proceedings for its collection).

The Regulations are aimed at improving access to invoice financing for small and medium-sized enterprises and the government speculates that this will provide a £1 billion, long-term, boost to the economy. Invoice financing allows businesses to assign their right to be paid by a customer to a finance provider. In return the finance provider provides the business with up-front funds, thereby speeding up the business’ working capital cycle (provided the debtor ultimately pays the assigned invoice). Before 1 January 2019, smaller businesses would usually be forced to engage with larger customers on those customers’ standard terms, which often contained non-assignment clauses. As a result, some smaller businesses were restricted from engaging with invoice financing opportunities. This should now change.

The Regulations apply to contracts for the supply of goods, services or intangible assets where the supplier has the right to be paid under the contract. There are, however, a number of exceptions including:

• a large enterprise or part of a large group (as defined by the Companies Act 2006); or
• a special purpose vehicle, set up to hold assets or finance commercial transactions involving it incurring a liability under an agreement of £10 million or more.
• The Regulations also do not apply to services of a financial nature. The definition of ‘financial nature’ is construed widely and includes, amongst other things, leasing, loan relationships and all types of securitisation and derivative transactions.
• The Regulations do not apply to contracts which have as their purpose the acquiring, disposing or transferring of ownership in a firm (as defined in the Companies Act 2006) whether incorporated or established, or of a business or undertaking. However, for this exemption to apply, the contract must include a statement to that effect.
• The Regulations generally do not apply to contracts that relate to non-UK businesses. However, parties cannot contract out of the Regulations by changing the contract’s governing law, if the only reason for doing so is to circumvent the regulations.
• There are also a number of other types of contracts which the Regulations do not apply to, including consumer contracts, real estate contracts, public-private partnership contracts and rental contracts. Interestingly, the Regulations will apply to building contracts which, up to now have been impossible to finance, in practice, through an invoice discounting arrangement.

Practical application

The Regulations will lead to the need for certain changes to the drafting and implementation of commercial contracts:

• No assignment clauses –  An eligible supplier will be able to assign their receivables to a debt purchaser without having to seek their customers’ prior consent. This means a blanket non-assignment clause will no longer work for on its own to preserve rights of set off;
• Confidentiality provisions –  Confidentiality obligations can still be imposed on suppliers, except for any “essential information” that enables the identification of the receivables following assignment. This means information that enables the identification of receivables (so as to facilitate their collection) may be disclosed by a supplier to a third party purchaser for the purpose of receivables assignment or transfer without constituting a breach of confidentiality.
• Set-off –  The Explanatory Note to the Regulations clarifies that a contractual right to set-off is not considered as a restriction on transfer of receivables for the purpose of the Regulations. Although the right to set-off is maintained, businesses may want to consider the practical impact of the Regulations on the mechanism to exercise the right to set-off, such as how cash flow will be affected if you are no longer able to consolidate future transactions to set-off against one original invoice that has already been assigned to a third party.

Many commercial arrangements will be unaffected by this change in legislation. However this will depend, in relation to contracts entered into this year and beyond, on the terms of the contract and the nature of what is being supplied under it. A key point to note is that the Regulations will not nullify the contract as a whole or, indeed, the whole of the clause restricting assignment, but only to the extent applicable to receivables.

Providers of invoice finance will still need to carry out due diligence, at least for now, on taking on any new invoice discounting client to ascertain the extent to which the debtor book may still contain debts which are subject to restrictions on assignment or are otherwise subject to rights of set off.

Small and medium sized companies seeking to avail themselves of the new rules should seek advice before doing so. Invoice discounting products can be an extremely effective way of assisting a growing business meet its working capital needs. However, lumpy cash flow, or bad debt experience (including habitual slow payers in the customer base) can lead to disaster if not properly managed.

If you need advice on how the Regulations may affect your business please get in touch.