Two contracts means two salaries?

castie

So situation is as follows.

Person A enters a contract with Company A for 30 euro a year.
After 6-7 months Person A signs contract with Company B for 40 euro a year.

Now Company A owns Company B but in the contracts they get refered to as A and B seperately. Clause in contract for Company B says it supersedes any agreement between Person A and the company.

Now I assume company here refers to Company B and not to any agreements with Company A.

Person A is now being paid 40 euro by Company B.
Does the fact that the contract for Company A is still in existance mean that if taken to court Company A would have to pay the 30 euro also?

Peregrinus

It’s a matter of construction of the contract, and you would need to read it very carefully.

You say that you “assume” that references in the contract with Company B to “the company” are references to Company B. Before assuming anything, read the contract to see if it contains a definition of “the company”, or if the way in which the term is used elsewhere in the contract suggests that it might have a wider meaning. Could it include the group of companies of which A and B are both a part?

Also, look at other terms of the contract which may be relevant. You don’t say that these are employment contracts, but I assume they are. Is there a clause in the later contract requiring the worker to devote himself full-time to the affairs of Company B, or to devote the whole of his effort and attention to those affairs, or requiring exclusive loyalty to Company B? If so, it’s arguable that there is an implied term that he will resign from or terminate his contract with Company A.

Similarly, if there is such a term in his contract with Company A, then there's a strong implication that he must resign/terminate on accepting an appointment from Company B.

(Note that termination of an employment contract does not normally have to be in writing.)

Finally, apply some common sense. Is A performing a different and additional set of duties for Company B, over and above the duties which he continues to perform for Company A? If so, an interpretation which allows him to receive two salaries may be reasonable. If not, it isn’t.

castie

Peregrinus wrote: »

It’s a matter of construction of the contract, and you would need to read it very carefully.

You say that you “assume” that references in the contract with Company B to “the company” are references to Company B. Before assuming anything, read the contract to see if it contains a definition of “the company”, or if the way in which the term is used elsewhere in the contract suggests that it might have a wider meaning. Could it include the group of companies of which A and B are both a part?

Also, look at other terms of the contract which may be relevant. You don’t say that these are employment contracts, but I assume they are. Is there a clause in the later contract requiring the worker to devote himself full-time to the affairs of Company B, or to devote the whole of his effort and attention to those affairs, or requiring exclusive loyalty to Company B? If so, it’s arguable that there is an implied term that he will resign from or terminate his contract with Company A.

Similarly, if there is such a term in his contract with Company A, then there's a strong implication that he must resign/terminate on accepting an appointment from Company B.

(Note that termination of an employment contract does not normally have to be in writing.)

Finally, apply some common sense. Is A performing a different and additional set of duties for Company B, over and above the duties which he continues to perform for Company A? If so, an interpretation which allows him to receive two salaries may be reasonable. If not, it isn’t.

Sorry yes they are employment contracts.

In each contract Contract is defined as the trading name.

So Company is refered to as "Ltd" in Contract A and "Pty" in Contract B.
There is no mention of the other in each contract.

Company B is registered in a different country than Company A.

Agreed common sense says no your not entitled to a second salary as the duties are the same.

My curiousity is if someone became disgruntled could they benefit from this situation by going the legal route?

Kosseegan

castie wrote: »

Sorry yes they are employment contracts.

In each contract Contract is defined as the trading name.

So Company is refered to as "Ltd" in Contract A and "Pty" in Contract B.
There is no mention of the other in each contract.

Company B is registered in a different country than Company A.

Agreed common sense says no your not entitled to a second salary as the duties are the same.

My curiousity is if someone became disgruntled could they benefit from this situation by going the legal route?

The only benefit would be a massive legal bill for themselves. trying to take advantage of anothers mistake in wording will backfire. One of the contracts will be regarded as void for mistake.

castie

Kosseegan wrote: »

The only benefit would be a massive legal bill for themselves. trying to take advantage of anothers mistake in wording will backfire. One of the contracts will be regarded as void for mistake.

But theres no mistake? Both contracts were written correctly except the first contract was never voided or superseded by anything.

Also discounting costs as thats a bit too "real" for this scenario.