Can you waive statutory rights

Grantor also waives any and all right of subrogation , contribution , reimbursement and indemnity whatsoever and any right of recourse to and with respect to the assets and property of any person that is or may be security for the Obligations.

Borrower shall not, nor shall Borrower permit any Loan Party to, avail itself of any appraisement , valuation , stay , extension or exemption laws, or any similar laws now existing or hereafter enacted , in order to prevent or hinder the enforcement of the Loan Documents or foreclosure of the Security Documents , but hereby waives the benefit of such laws to the full extent that such Person may do so under Applicable Law.

Borrower hereby waives for itself and all who may claim through or under it including, but not limited to, the Loan Parties and the Senior Loan Obligors , and to the full extent Borrower may do so under Applicable Law, any and all rights of redemption from sale under any order or decree of foreclosure of any Security Document or granted under any statute now existing or hereafter enacted.

To the full extent permitted by law, Trustor hereby expressly waives any and all rights to reinstatement and redemption , on its own behalf, on behalf of all persons claiming or having an interest direct or indirect by, through or under Trustor and on behalf of each and every person acquiring any interest in or title to the Secured Property subsequent to the date hereof , it being the intent hereof that any and all such rights of reinstatement and redemption of Trustor and such other persons , are and shall be deemed to be hereby waived to the full extent permitted by applicable law.

To the full extent permitted by law, Trustor hereby waives any statute of limitations applicable to this Deed of Trust. To the full extent permitted by law, Trustor agrees that it will not, by invoking or utilizing any applicable law or laws or otherwise, hinder , delay or impede the exercise of any right, power or remedy herein or otherwise granted or delegated to Trustee or Beneficiary , but will suffer and permit the exercise of every such right, power and remedy as though no such law or laws have been or will have been made or enacted.

To the full extent permitted by law, Trustor hereby agrees that no action for the enforcement of the lien or any provision hereof shall be subject to any defense which would not be good and valid in an action at law upon the Note. The Data Privacy Law No.

Provided that the same business activity is maintained, the new employer takes the position of the former employer in the employment contracts and takes their position in respect of the rights and obligations arising from the employment relationships. This is the case even if the employment contract is terminated before the transfer.

The new employer takes their position as the employer of such former employees in respect of due and non-paid credits.

All credits, rights and obligations of the employer arising from the execution and implementation of the employment contract, its violation or termination are subject to a statute of limitations of 1 year starting on the day following the day of termination of the contract.

Employees keep the same seniority and acquired rights which they had in the service of their former employer. The new employer undertakes the obligations of the former employer limited to those incurred during the 12 months prior to the modification, provided that, up to 22 business days prior to the modification, the new mployer gives notice to the employees that they must claim their credits up to the 2nd business day prior to the date scheduled for such modification.

Within 22 business days following the modification of employer, the employees have the right to terminate the employment contract with prior notice, but this does not confer any right to compensation. In order to carry out their duties, trade union representatives are entitled to 4 paid hours a month but must notify the employer in advance of the date and number of days they require for the exercise of trade union functions.

Employers are obliged to provide a suitable place for workers' meetings whenever this is requested by the union representatives. Unilateral termination by the employer: dismissal based on objective grounds ie, redundancy reasons ; disciplinary dismissal with just cause ie, based on serious breach of the employee's duties. Termination without cause with notice : only for employees hired under an employment contract of service commission regime a particular type of contract for high-level employees which provides flexibility for termination but is not common.

Other termination causes: mutual agreement, termination by the employee ie, termination with notice or constructive dismissal with just cause , expiration ie, fixed-term and open-term contracts or retirement. As a general rule, a copy of the notice served on the employee must be forwarded to General Labor Inspectorate. Except in respect of protected employees, third-party approval is not required to terminate an employment.

If economic, technological or structural circumstances occur, which may be clearly demonstrated and which involve an internal reorganization or conversion, or the reduction or the shutting down of activities, which makes it necessary to eliminate or significantly change job positions, the employer may terminate the employment contracts of the employees who perform such job positions. Information to the General Labour Inspectorate is required. However, there is no need to obtain approval for termination.

The General Labor Inspectorate may undertake the diligence deemed necessary for clarification of the situation and, in case of a collective dismissal, during the period in which the evaluation of the General Labor Inspectorate occurs, the employer may promote a meeting with the representative body or with the committee appointed for the purpose of exchange of information and clarification and may forward the conclusions of the meetings to the General Labor Inspectorate.

For individual dismissals based on objective grounds up to 20 employees : the employer must forward, at least 30 days in advance, prior notice of dismissal to the employee or employees who occupy the job positions to be extinguished or transformed. Notice periods in case of term contract: 15 business days if its duration is equal to or higher than 3 months.

A clause of the employment contract which restricts the activity of the employee for a period of time, which may not exceed 3 years from the termination of the contract, is lawful if the following conditions are met: a such clause is included, in writing, in the employment contract, or in its addendum; b the activity performed may cause real damage to the employer and may be considered as unfair competition; c the employee is paid a salary during the period of restriction of work: the corresponding amount will be included in the contract or its addendum, and it must be taken into account, in its calculation, the fact that the employer may have incurred in significant expenses in the professional training of the employee.

A clause which requires an employee who benefits from professional improvement or higher level education at the expense of the employer to remain at the service of the same employer for a certain period of time, provided that such period does not exceed 1 year, in case of training of professional improvement and up to 3 years in case of courses of high level education, is also lawful if established in writing.

The employer that hires the employee within the period of restriction of activity in the company is jointly liable for the damages caused by the employee or for the amount not returned by the employee. In principle, statutory rights cannot be waived and any waiver of such rights will be null and void. If the relevant court declares the dismissal to be unlawful, by final judgment, the employer must immediately re-instate the employee in the same job position and benefiting from the same previous conditions, or, alternatively, shall indemnify the employee compensation is different depending on whether it is a large, medium, small or micro company and the cause of dismissal.

In addition to re-instatement or the compensation, the employee is entitled to the base salaries they would have received if they had continued to perform work, until the date on which the employee finds a new job or up to the date of final judgment, whichever comes first, with a maximum limit of 6 months of base salary for large companies, 4 months to medium companies and 2 months for small and micro companies. Typically, non-compliance with employment laws leads to administrative proceedings which may lead to the payment of fines.

If such non-compliance is based on violation of rights that deserve protection under criminal law, it may also lead to this type of judicial proceedings. Pursuant to the LCL, any executed agreement that suppresses or reduces rights granted by the LCL, labor laws related to specific industries, collective agreements or individual employment contracts, either at the time of their agreement or execution, or the exercise of the rights arising from its termination, shall be null and void.

Enforceable to waive contractual rights. Employees often cannot waive or contract out of statutory entitlements. Not enforceable for the future with respect to statutory rights. With respect to rights already accrued, Austrian courts usually are of the opinion that employees may not waive them. Waiver agreements are commonly used, but there is no clear data to illustrate their positive effect. Enforceable, but employees may only sign a settlement agreement with regard to acquired rights and not with regard to future rights.

Generally, employees may not waive or contract out of statutory rights or benefits unless they are doing so in exchange for a "greater right or benefit" with respect to the same subject matter of the right being waived. While the employment agreement is in force, the employees cannot waive most legal rights.

After the termination of employment agreements, rights can be waived by the employee, usually signing a final settlement agreement, known as "finiquito. While an employee may be asked to waive statutory rights, there is some uncertainty as to whether such a waiver would be effective to prevent an employee from subsequently bringing a claim for statutory rights.

Enforceable and advisable through a labor settlement before a Labor Judge or the Ministry of Labor. However, employees cannot waive their vested mandatory benefits or rights. In general, waivers of rights and settlement agreements are enforceable, provided that the terms and conditions are fair and balanced; however, the employee is not bound by agreed terms and conditions deviating from mandatory employment law legislation, in which case a waiver by the employee is not enforceable.

A waiver of rights is possible only in exit or settlement agreements and only to a certain extent. According to the Employment Contracts Act, an employee cannot waive mandatory minimum rights provided by the Act. An employee may waive their rights in a settlement agreement concluded with their employer after termination of their employment contract. Criminal claims are not covered.

A settlement indemnity is always paid on top of mandatory severance. A settlement agreement cannot effect a termination as opposed to, for example, a resignation, dismissal or retirement leave and is simply a way to obtain a waiver of claims or disputes. A mutual termination rupture conventionnelle does not result in a settlement agreement or waiver. Enforceable; subject to legal review if, for instance, employees were not given time to consider. While an employee may be asked to waive statutory rights, there is some uncertainty as to whether such a waiver would be effective in preventing an employee from subsequently bringing a claim to exercise their statutory rights.

The doctrine of waiver is recognized in Indian contract law. A waiver must amount to an unambiguous representation arising as the result of a positive and intentional act done by the party granting the concession with knowledge of all the material circumstances. Though any waiver against statutory entitlements given by an employee is unlikely to be enforceable, a generic waiver of contractual rights may be enforced.

The general freedom of contract provisions of the Indonesian Civil Code allows parties to waive rights; however, the operation of such waiver is not permitted if it results in a violation of public policy or order, or is not applied in good faith. Enforceable, but employees must have had the benefit of independent legal advice prior to signing a settlement agreement waiving employment rights.

Generally enforceable, if the employee receives additional benefits in consideration for signing the waiver commensurate with the rights waived. Employees may not waive certain statutory rights and benefits. Immediately unchallengeable if signed before a "protected venue" ie, an administrative, union or judicial office , or challengeable within 6 months after termination. To be valid, the waiver must be given voluntarily and knowingly by the employee.

In order to avoid any claim from an employee that the waiver is not valid because it was given under duress or as a result of a mistake due to fraudulent representation by the employer, meetings with the employee should be fairly short and attended by only 1 or 2 managers.

The employee should be given a reasonable amount of time to consider the document containing the waiver and should not be told that they will be terminated if they do not sign. While a waiver or discharge is legally enforceable provided it is not achieved through intimidation, coercion, inducement or another factor that would vitiate an ordinary contract, it is important to note that it cannot be used by an employer to avoid the liability of paying the employee's statutory and contractual dues.

The court would void such waiver or discharge upon evidence that it was intended to deprive the employee of their lawful dues. Waiver agreements are commonly used, but their enforceability has not been tested by the Kuwait courts and there is no system of precedence in Kuwait. Generally enforceable, but subject to legal review based on the scope and circumstances in which the waiver was given.

Enforceable; however, employees cannot waive their right to receive mandatory benefits or rights. Not admitted for all mandatory statutory provisions contained in the Labor Code and related decrees. When terminating an employee's employment, is it not common to enter into a settlement agreement or waiver.

However, when the employment contract is terminated by mutual agreement between the employer and the employee, such termination is usually finalized in front of a labor inspector who drafts an agreement between the parties.

Once this agreement is signed, the employee automatically waives their rights to claim compensation. No precedents, but waivers and releases are common, particularly in cases of termination by agreement.

The waiver of statutory rights is not regulated in the labor laws of Myanmar. The enforceability of a waiver of claims by an employee is not addressed by law.

A buyer retains the right to terminate a contract in the absence of a clear statement alerting the buyer to the warning statement.

A contract can only be terminated for breach of a warning statement requirement but only within 90 days after the contract has been entered into or settlement whichever is earlier. Examples are given whereby the warning statement and the relevant contract are either bound or stapled together. The requirement to sign new warning statements if a counter-offer is made has also been removed.

The existing s which sets out when parties are bound under a relevant contract has been removed. It would therefore appear that the common law in relation to when parties become bound or contract for the sale of land now apply.

As a consequence many of the authorities referred to in this paper will only be of academic consideration in so far as contracts for the sale of residential property in Queensland are terminated after the amendments come into effect which is expected on 30 October Under the LSA the emphasis is on providing the buyer with sufficient information so the proposed allotment can be identified.

Under the BCCMA the emphasis is on providing information relating to the proposed body corporate, annual contributions to the body corporate, letting details, management details and body corporate assets.

There is a requirement both under the LSA and the BCCMA to rectify any inaccuracies in the original disclosure statement after the contract is entered into. Under the BCCMA a buyer has 14 days after receiving a rectifying statement to terminate the contract if they are materially prejudiced by the inaccuracy. However such termination can only occur before the expiration of 30 days after a correcting statement has been received or the delivery of a registrable instrument of transfer whichever is the earlier.

The EPA provides that land which is on the Environmental Management Register can only be sold where the buyer is notified in writing that the land is on such register prior to the contract being signed. A failure to do so entitles the buyer to terminate the contract at any time up to completion. Where a party is entitled to bring a contract to an end but chooses to continue with the contract by exercising rights or otherwise conducting itself in a way explicable only on the basis that the contract remains on foot then that party is taken to have affirmed the contract and thereby lost the right of termination.

The defendants argued that they did no more than keep open the possibility of settlement, by calling for the transfer to be provided for stamping. But in doing so they invoked cl. That was a right only available to them whilst the contract subsisted and in my view would have constituted an election to affirm the contract had I concluded that the defendants had a right to avoid it.

A statutory right can only be waived if it confers a private benefit although some public benefit may also be involved. Some authorities suggest that waiver of a statutory right of rescission requires knowledge not only of the relevant facts but also the legal right to rescind. Stephen J in Sargent at after reviewing the relevant authorities If a party to a contract, aware of a breach going to the root of the contract, or of other circumstances entitling him to terminate the contract, though unaware of the existence of the right to terminate the contract, exercises rights under the contract, he must be held to have made a binding election to affirm.

Such conduct is justifiable only on the footing that an election has been made to affirm the contract; the conduct is adverse to the other party and may therefore be considered unequivocal in its effect.

The justification for imputing to the affirming party a binding election in these circumstances, though he be unaware of his alternative right, is that, having a knowledge of the facts sufficient to alert him to the possibility of the existence of his alternative right, he has acted adversely to the other party and that, by so doing, he has induced the other party to believe that performance of the contract is insisted upon.

It is with these considerations in mind that the law attributes to the party the making of a choice, though he be ignorant of his alternative right. For reasons stated earlier the affirming party cannot be permitted to change his position once he has elected. The Full Federal Court of Australia Von Doussa, Mansfield and Goldberg JJ in Ellison v Lutre Pty Ltd and Anor [12] held that there is no such rule and it is a matter of construction of the particular statute to determine whether the option to avoid may only be lost if there is knowledge of such legal right.

In Juniper v Roberts [13] a contract for the sale of residential land failed to have attached to it a warning statement as the first or top sheet. However the contract was not due to settle for two years. Mr Juniper the purchaser moved into possession, leased the property to other people and carried out some renovation work.

It was also advertised for sale but not sold. Shortly before settlement he gave notice of termination as a consequence of a breach of section 3 of PAMDA. The vendor argued that Mr Juniper waived his right to terminate the contract. In finding there had been no waiver Douglas J said:- [14]. In proceeding with the contract until close to the time for settlement Mr Juniper did not elect to forego the statutory right to terminate at any time before settlement.

Accordingly, there is no occasion to apply the doctrines of waiver or election. These decisions seemed to be decided on the basis that because there is a right to terminate at any time before the contract settles the purchaser can do what he or she likes but always maintains such statutory right.