Dear Anonymous, If a contract has expired, only the terms agreed by the parties will survive. They only survive for what was in that agreement. For example, if you had a 3-year guarantee, only the product you purchased under that agreement would benefit and would not be affected by the various terms of the new agreement. The new agreement with the merger clause excluded the previous agreement. Only these conditions apply to purchases or work made under this new agreement. On the basis of these two points, your argument is reasonable. Your argument makes no sense. For it to be included in the initial application of the agreement, it should be clear that the specific language should apply to all work, now and in the future, and that the expiry date should be extended. In addition, there should have been a specific exclusion clause (full agreement) for that specific language. I have a topic that I would like to see. I borrowed from my company to pay for tuition.
The contract I signed for the money has a definite action, which I will pay back if I leave before my time is owed. I am prepared to pay that amount without asking any questions. When they leave the company, they tell me that I owe another amount because they refer to a study contract that is in the staff manual that I signed for years before I thought about borrowing money. The words of the contract are usually the same wording, the difference lies in the actions that are taken when I leave the company. The manual contract, which would benefit the company more, is why it would like to use it. However, I signed an updated training form and signed up for the money under the terms of the contract. To what extent is this situation sticky with regard to priority, what contract will have weight if it goes to court? During an audit, you will find that new services have been included in the provider`s billing, as well as a clause stating that “if the amounts charged for new services are not refused within 30 days, they are part of the contract.” You check the priority clause in the original contract and it says that if there is an inconsistency between the contract and an invoice, account or document, the contract is in place. The priority clause in the contract removes the additional clause on the invoice. It is the one that has not been signed-Yushin invests in helping staff education, expecting that the investment will be made through improved work performance. However, when a worker voluntarily separates from Yushin`s employment within three years of an education assistance allowance, the amount of the payment is considered only as a loan.