Judicial principles and studies
Dispute with the University's Owning Company: Proper Party and Effect of the University President's Contract
Summary explaining that the University of Applied Sciences and its owning company are separate legal entities; when the university president signs the mission contract within his authority, the university is the real party to the dispute, and suing the owning company amounts to suing the wrong party.
Updated: 10 September 2026
Prepared and reviewed by: Ashraf Al-Khawaja
Subject
The available official points address who is the proper party in litigation arising from a mission/dispatch contract and assess the relationship between the university and its owning company, focusing on the effect of the university president's signature on the contract.
Summary
The official material indicates that the University of Applied Sciences and the owning company are distinct legal entities. Where the university president executed the mission contract within his authority, the university constitutes the actual party opposed to the claimant, not the owning company that holds the trade name. Therefore, filing the suit against the owning company amounts to proceeding against the wrong party, and appending a phrase that the company is the owner of the university's trade name does not rectify a dispute that was initially brought against the company rather than the university.
Practical significance
Practically, the points underscore the need to identify the legally accountable entity when initiating claims tied to acts of university officials. Naming the company with a reference to ownership of the trade name does not substitute for directing the claim against the university entity itself when it is the proper party. This content is an educational summary only and does not constitute court text or legal advice.
Sources and references
Verify the official text and latest amendments before relying on this material professionally.