Try:
termination for convenienceliability capa question it refuses ↗Not unilaterally. Assignment requires the counterparty's prior written consent, and a change of control is expressly treated as an assignment for the purposes of that clause § 14.2. Consent may not be unreasonably withheld where the successor meets the financial covenants in § 9.4.
One exception exists: assignment to a wholly-owned affiliate requires notice only, not consent.
This corpus contains no governing-law opinions. Asked whether the clause is enforceable in a given jurisdiction, the system abstains rather than answers. That behaviour is scored, not hidden.
latency
1.7s
chunks read
8 of 41
rerank
bge-v2
in benchmark
yes · item 037
Retrieved evidence · 3 of 8 shown
MSA-2024-0142.pdf · p.14
score 0.91
“…neither party shall assign this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other, and any change of control of a party shall be deemed an assignment for the purposes of this Section 14.2…”
MSA-2024-0142.pdf · p.9
score 0.78
“…consent shall not be unreasonably withheld where the successor entity satisfies the financial covenants set out in Section 9.4…”
Amendment-3.docx · p.2
score 0.71
“…assignment to a wholly-owned affiliate of Supplier shall require notice only…”
Exact configuration
model
qwen3-8b-instruct
quantization
Q4_K_M
runtime
mlx 0.19
index
qdrant · hybrid + bm25
context
16k · 8 chunks max
hardware
MacBook Pro M4 · 24GB
adaptation
none — RAG cleared the bar
© 2026 Corpus Aegis · corpusaegis.com
Model licences · SBOM · Security · Benchmark custody policy