What action is required for a name change rather than a novation?

In the context of contracts, a name change often does not require formal action if the identity of the contractual party has changed, but the party itself remains responsible for fulfilling the terms of the contract. This is particularly the case when the name change does not affect the substantive rights and obligations established in the contract. Therefore, no formal action is typically needed to acknowledge that change.

This stands in contrast to a novation, which involves a complete substitution of one party for another, thereby releasing the original party from obligations under the contract. For a name change, if no novation is occurring, and if all parties are aware of the change, the continuation of the contract under the new name can proceed without additional formal requirements, as long as the contractual performance remains unaffected.

In contrast, options that suggest a need for formal amendments or agreements do not align with the simplicity of a name change. A formal amendment could imply substantial changes to the contract terms, whereas the question focuses on a situation where the contract remains fundamentally unchanged despite the name adjustment. Similarly, requiring both parties to agree on the change implies a level of negotiation that is unnecessary just for a name adjustment when the existing obligations remain intact and undisturbed.