(The extent of the validity of a signature with a personal seal in Libyan law - a comment on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Civil Appeal No. 342/69 Q issued on 6/13/2023 AD)

Written evidence is one of the most important and reliable forms of proof, as it can be prepared in advance in anticipation of any future dispute, and is valid for proof without fear of being affected by forgetfulness or corruption of conscience. Just as it may be official, prepared by a public employee or a person charged with a public service, which gives it absolute authority, it may also be customary, prepared by the concerned parties themselves without adhering to a specific formality, which increases the likelihood of fraud and deception. Therefore, the law requires that these papers be signed to ensure the knowledge and consent of those to whom they are attributed, while specifying the form of signature as either a signature or a fingerprint, as they are more indicative of the issuance of the paper by the person who signed it with one of them. However, the Supreme Court, in the ruling under comment, equated signing with a signature or fingerprint and signing using a seal, despite the fact that the Civil Code does not stipulate this method of signing, and the problems its use causes in the field of proof. This necessitates analyzing this ruling and examining the grounds on which the court relied in this regard, and the extent to which it adhered to the powers granted to it.