Judicial principles and studies
Criterion for Distinguishing Employment Contracts and Agency Agreements
This summary outlines the core difference between employment and agency contracts regarding the nature of tasks and legal subordination, noting that agency excludes material acts under the civil definition.
Updated: 10 September 2026
Prepared and reviewed by: Ashraf Al-Khawaja
Subject
An employment contract may cover assigning either material (physical) tasks or legal acts; by contrast, the agency definition in Article 833 limits agency to legal acts and excludes material tasks.
Summary
The distinguishing criterion is legal subordination: a worker who is subject to the employer's supervision, direction and control over how, when and by what means the work is performed is characterized by an employment relationship. When such oversight is absent and the person performs the task freely within legal bounds, the relationship points to agency for legal acts or to contracting for material works. Instructions from a principal to an agent are generally broad guidance and do not, by themselves, create the same legal dependence because the agent retains operational independence. Where a person carries out mixed functions—some subject to supervision and others performed independently—each function should be assessed and, if possible, separated according to its nature. Judicial decisions cited in the material reflect this approach (Distinctions No. 7279/2018; Rights Distinctions 1427/2010; Rights Distinctions 3204/2005). This is a general educational summary and not judicial text or legal advice.
Practical significance
This is a general educational summary based on the points published in the official source. It does not replace the original material or a review by Ashraf Al-Khawaja before relying on it for any action.
Sources and references
Verify the official text and latest amendments before relying on this material professionally.