Judicial principles and studies
Attorney‑Appointment Agreement in Judicial Custodianship: Legal Framework
The study examines the validity of an attorney‑appointment agreement signed by a judicial custodian as company representative after appointment and before its annulment, and outlines the legal character of custodianship and the custodian’s powers. It summarizes the custodian’s responsibilities and the application of depositary and agency rules.
Updated: 10 September 2026
Prepared and reviewed by: Ashraf Al-Khawaja
Subject
The study addresses the validity of an attorney/ legal‑counsel appointment agreement executed by a judicial custodian acting as the company’s representative during the interval after the judicial appointment and before any annulment, and describes custodianship’s legal character and the custodian’s powers.
Summary
- An attorney‑appointment agreement signed by the judicial custodian after the judge’s appointment and before its annulment by the appellate court is considered valid and effective vis‑à‑vis the principal, as it is concluded by a legal deputy authorized by the appointment ruling. - Judicial custodianship is treated as both a legal and a judicial proxy: the law defines its scope, conditions, elements and effects, and the custodian’s status is conferred by the judicial decision that appoints them. - The custodian’s status is established upon issuance of the custodianship order without requiring notification; nevertheless, the appointed custodian has the right to accept or refuse the assignment and is not compelled to assume it. - The custodian is the sole person responsible for managing the assets placed under custody, including preservation, maintenance, exploitation and litigation to the extent required for administration and under the conditions set by the custody order. - The custodian’s role combines depositary duties (safeguarding funds) and agency duties (managing them); where the custody order omits specific obligations or rights, statutory rules on depositaries and agency apply.
Practical significance
- Agreements entered into by the custodian during the scope of their judicial appointment produce contractual effects against the principal while the custodian’s mandate remains in force under the judgment. - Recognizing custodianship as a form of proxy clarifies the practical limits and authorities available to the custodian in asset management, litigation and preservation of rights. - Applying depositary and agency rules fills gaps when a custody order does not specify the custodian’s duties and rights, guiding day‑to‑day administration of the assets. This is an educational general summary; it is not judicial text and does not constitute legal advice.
Sources and references
Verify the official text and latest amendments before relying on this material professionally.