Judicial principles and studies
Principal's Name and Probative Value of Unsigned Computerized Extract
This summary outlines the rules on power of attorney validity and the evidentiary weight of unsigned computerized extracts, and explains appeal mechanics and consequences of cassation under the civil procedure code.
Updated: 10 September 2026
Prepared and reviewed by: Ashraf Al-Khawaja
Subject
The study addresses (1) the evidentiary effect of a power of attorney that names the principal both personally and as authorized signatory for a company, and (2) the legal weight of a computerized extract lacking any signature or seal compared with an official company registration certificate. It also explains appeal rules under Article 169 (and paragraph 2) of the civil procedure code, consequences of failing to appeal an initial judgment on a statute‑of‑limitations objection, and the appellate court’s duties after cassation under Article 202.
Summary
- Where a power of attorney’s opening identifies the principal in both personal capacity and as authorized signatory, includes the principal’s signature and a written indication of her authority, and is certified by the agent’s lawyer, and where the company registration certificate presented confirms her appointment and authorization, the power confers on the agent the authority to sue on her behalf both personally and as the company’s authorized signatory. - A computerized extract that lacks any signature or seal attributable to a person or official body cannot be relied upon as proof in light of the official company registration certificate presented in the case. - Article 169 generally assigns the right to appeal to the unsuccessful party but allows the prevailing party to appeal when the judgment rests on reasons different from those underlying its claim; if a party relies on reasons differing from those in its pleading it must appeal under Article 169/2 rather than through the responsive pleading. - Failure to appeal an initial judgment concerning a statute‑of‑limitations objection constitutes waiver of that defense, so the decision cannot be overturned later solely by arguments raised in the responsive pleading. - Seeking cassation based on matters in the responsive pleading can worsen the appellant’s position. - Under Article 202, after cassation the appellate court must either follow the cassation decision or persist in its prior ruling for the reasons it gave; if it follows cassation, it must continue proceedings from the point identified in the cassation and limit its review to the matters covered by that decision. This content is an educational summary and not a judicial text or legal advice.
Practical significance
- Confirm the formal elements of powers of attorney, including signatures and lawyer certification, and cross‑check company registration data before accepting courtroom representation. - Do not treat unsigned or unsealed computerized extracts as substitutes for the official registration certificate when proving company status. - Use the appropriate appeal route (Article 169/2) when relying on grounds different from those pleaded to avoid procedural shortcomings or prejudice. - Be aware that failing to timely appeal an initial ruling can forfeit the right to later assert certain defenses. - Recognize the appellate court’s obligation to proceed from the point of cassation when it elects to follow that decision.
Sources and references
Verify the official text and latest amendments before relying on this material professionally.