What is the consequence of a purported assignment made in violation of the Agreement?

The consequence of a purported assignment made in violation of the Agreement being deemed null and void is indicative of strong legal protections in place regarding assignments and transfers. When an assignment is made contrary to the terms of an Agreement, it signals that the original parties intended to limit or control the assignment process, likely to ensure that only qualified or approved entities can take over obligations or benefits under the contract.

Labeling such an assignment as null and void means it holds no legal standing and cannot be enforced. This protects the integrity of the contract and the interests of the parties who have not agreed to the assignee. By making assignments void in case of violations, the Agreement maintains a mechanism that ensures that parties cannot simply transfer their rights or obligations without express consent, preserving stability and predictability in contractual relationships.

Other options suggest that the assignment could be reviewed, enforced, or negotiated, which contradicts the established principle that unauthorized assignments are invalid. Such provisions would undermine the Agreement's intent to ensure that all parties involved remain accountable and that any successors meet the necessary criteria established initially.