What does the contract really mean?
<p>I have been working in a company in Cambodia for about 5 months now and I am thinking of leaving the company for various reasons. When I asked them for resignation, they said that the minimum prior notice is 60 days. Reading the contract once again, it seems like the contract contradicts itself. Please read the below agreement:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Termination of Contract:</p>
<ol>
<li>During the probationary period, either the Employer or the Employee may terminate this Contract by forwarding seven days' prior written notice with an indication to terminate this Contract.</li>
<li>Upon satisfactory completion of the Probationary Period, either the Employer or the Employee may terminate this Contract without a prior witten notice.</li>
<li>Subject to the &quot;minimum period of prior written notice&quot; requirement pursuant to Article 75 of the Labor Law of the Kingdom of Cambodia, the Employer may cancel the Contract for a valid reason including the Employee's lack of skills, inappropriate behavior, or failure to satisfy the requirements of the Employer (the &quot;Lay Off&quot;). However, the Employee may cancel the Contract with prior written notice, minimum 60 days before quit.</li>
</ol>
</blockquote>
<p>As I understand, 1.) If i were in the probation period, then I need to give seven days prior notice before I can terminate the contract. 2.) After probation period, both parties (employee &amp; employer) can terminate the contract without any notice.</p>
<p>Is there anything wrong with this Analysis? The second point is stated that both parties can terminate the contract without any notice, but point 3 state something else?</p>
<p>So any people can give me an explanation about this so I can get this more clearly?</p>
<p>Note: I have passed the probation period now (3 months require only).</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cambodiainvestment.gov.kh/the-labor-law-of-cambodia_970313.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Cambodia Labor Law reference</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>After probation period, both parties (employee &amp; employer) can
  terminate the contract without any notice.</p>
  
  <p>Is there anything wrong with this Analysis?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>You may resign <em>without a prior written notice</em>, provided that (1) your employer --not you-- drafted the contract, and (2) Probationary Period reached satisfactory completion. Condition (1) is typically the case in employment relations, and your description purports that you satisfy (2).</p>

<p>Items 2 and 3 clearly contradict each other. One key aspect is whether or not Cambodia applies the doctrine of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contra_proferentem" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>contra proferentem</em></a>, which apparently <a href="http://www.legal500.com/c/cambodia/developments/8762" rel="nofollow noreferrer">it does</a>. Thus, you are entitled to terminate the contract in accordance with Item 2. Because of the same doctrine, though, your employer would not be allowed to choose Item 2 if you argue that he should comply with Item 3.</p>

<p>Additionally, note that Article 13 provides that the nature of the [Labor] law </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>is not obstructive to the granting of benefits or the rights superior
  to the benefits and the rights defined in this law, <strong>granted to
  workers</strong> by a unilateral decision of an employer or a group of
  employers, [or] <strong>by an employment contract</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<p>(emphasis and brackets added)</p>

<p>Item 2 clearly is such a right. Thus, Article 13 and the language of Item 2 exempt you --insofar as employee-- from the requirements of "prior notice" as enacted in Articles 74 and 75. By contrast, Article 13 mentions no exception premised on <em>rights granted to the employer</em>.</p>

<p>Even if there were such statutory exception to the benefit of the employer, the doctrine of <em>contra proferentem</em> would prevent the employer from taking advantage thereof (as explained in my 2nd paragraph).</p>

<p>I am not a lawyer, and I am not your lawyer.</p>

<p>My reading of the contract has your employees to be correct, as I interpret the contract as similar to how I was hired, a situation called "contract-to-hire". </p>

<p>In essence, there was originally a time-limited contract for three months, distinct from formal employment, which either party could end with 7 days notice. </p>

<p>At the end of that three month period, if you did well enough (which apparently ) they would extend formal employment to you, which you accepted (by continuing to work), but you could have refused (which would amount to terminating the contract without notice); if you didn't do well enough, they wouldn't extend formal employment to you,</p>

<p>Now that you are formally employed, your relationship is governed per Article 75, under which you must give 60 days notice, and they can only fire you for a legal cause(the contract specifies three).</p>

<p>In summary, your ability to end the contract without notice was limited to a specific point, namely the completion of your probationary period.</p>

contract-law