ABSTRACT
Equitable principles will govern the validity of an assignment where either the law has no application, or the law has not been fully complied with. Where an assignor attempts to assign an equitable interest, unless statutory provisions regulate the assignment requirements, equitable principles will govern the assignment (Booth v FCT (1987)). Where an assignor attempts to assign a mere expectancy, it will be invalid at law but may be enforced in equity if valuable consideration is given (Holroyd v Marshall (1862)). Where an assignor attempts to assign property which is legally capable of assignment, but all the requirements have not been complied with, equity may enforce the assignment if the assignor has shown sufficient intention, through her acts, that an assignment was intended (Milroy v Lord (1862)). A miscellaneous category of rights exist which are not capable of being assigned, either in common law or equity, and these include: rights under a personal contract for services, rights to seek legal action (such as the right to seek damages for a breach of contract) and other rights which would be against public policy to assign.
