The institution of assignment of binding claims is known since Roman private law functioned and is widely used in modern civil turnover, as a result of which it traditionally attracts the close attention of representatives of civil science. In particular, the essence of the assignment of the right and its limitations are widely studied. At the same time, according to the overwhelming majority of scientists, the assignment of a right is a distribution transaction, which legal effect is the transferring of this right from one person (the original creditor, assignor) to another person (the new creditor, assignee).

Using formal-logical, historical and comparative-legal research methods the author proves that the assignment of a right is an obligatory transaction (unilateral or bilateral — a constitutive agreement), according to which the assignor transfers or undertakes to transfer the right to the assignee. This transaction — being aimed at alienation of the right in full or in part (share) — entails a singular succession in the form of replacement or replenishment of subjects on the authorized side of the obligation respectively. As for the assignment, it is understood as a variety of singular succession in the form of the transfer of rights from the assignor to the assignee. A cession in a broad sense is the transfer of a right under a transaction (bilateral, unilateral) or by force of law. Accordingly, the transaction is divided into transaction and regulatory elements. The current Civil Code of the Russian Federation presents a narrow understanding of a cession as a transfer of rights only on the basis of a bilateral transaction. Such an understanding, in essence, leads to the identification of the agreement on the assignment of rights and the assignment (the actual transfer of rights).

Restrictions on the turnover of binding rights and the consequences of violation of such restrictions are considered. It is proved that the negative restriction (prohibition) of the turnover of binding rights has a natural or artificial nature. The assignment of a right under a natural restriction is unrealistic by virtue of the substance of the relevant claim. A transaction of assignment of a right in the presence of a natural restriction should be recognized as invalid due to the actual absence of a condition on the subject in it. In cases of artificial restriction, the assignment of rights is possible in principle, but for the protection of certain interests it is prohibited by the agreement between the creditor and the debtor or by law.