A wedding planner hires a bakery to make cupcakes. The bakery’s head baker goes on leave and the bakery assigns the contract to a pastry chef who has an equal reputation and skill. The wedding planner is informed and does not object. The pastry chef fully performs and the cupcakes conform to the contract. Under nondelegable duties, what is the likely result?

• A. The wedding planner can sue the pastry chef for breach because delegation is invalid.
• B. The wedding planner is not harmed because delegation is automatically allowed unless prohibited.
• C. Delegation is permitted here because the contract did not prohibit delegation and the other party has no substantial interest in having the original baker perform.
• D. Delegation is always prohibited in service contracts.

Answer: (C)

Delegation of duties is allowed when the contract does not prohibit it and there is no substantial interest requiring the original performer. Nondelegable duties come into play only if the contract expressly requires personal performance or if the other party has a strong interest in having the original person perform. Here, nothing in the agreement prohibits delegation, the wedding planner has no substantial interest in the bakery’s specific employee performing, and the pastry chef has equal skill and reputation. The pastry chef fully performs and the cupcakes meet the contract, so the delegation does not create a breach. If any of those conditions were different—for example, if the contract demanded the original baker’s personal touch or the wedding planner valued the particular baker’s reputation—the delegation could be improper and the promisor could be liable for breach.