A wedding planner contracts with a bakery to make cupcakes. The bakery assigns the contract to a pastry chef, who is equally skilled. The planner did not object. The pastry chef fully performed and delivered cupcakes that conform to the contract. Which statement best supports the planner’s position?

• A. Yes, because the assignment of the contract was permitted and the pastry chef properly performed.
• B. No, because the original bakery remains liable for performance.
• C. Yes, because assignments always transfer duties as well as rights.
• D. No, because the pastry chef’s performance is not the original.

Answer: (A)

The key idea is that a contract right can be assigned to a third party, and if the other party does not object, the assignment is effective and the third party can perform in place of the original party. Here, the bakery assigned its contract to the pastry chef, and the planner did not object. The pastry chef performed fully and delivered cupcakes that conform to the contract. So the planner has received the promised performance, and there’s no breach to support a claim by the planner. The bakery would remain liable to the planner if the assignee failed, but that doesn’t change the fact that the contract was satisfied. It’s also worth noting that assignments transfer rights, not duties; duties are typically delegated and may still bind the original party, which is why the option claiming a transfer of duties is incorrect.