Legal case precedents refer to previous judicial decisions that serve as a guide for future cases. When a court decides a case, it often issues a written opinion that includes reasoning and legal principles applied. These principles and reasoning become precedents if they are deemed significant and applicable to future cases.

Precedents help to ensure that the law is applied consistently and predictably, which is essential for fairness and stability in the legal system.

In order to spread awareness among the legal community about the latest principles that we have obtained, we publish some of the judicial precedents.

🔅Judgment of The Egyptian sports settlement and arbitration center

In Arbitration No. 15 of 5J/2022, Submitted by the President of the Egyptian Squash Federation in his capacity:

1. The declaration of invalidity of the convening of the General Assembly of the Federation based on the lack of jurisdiction of the Coordinating Committee to approve the classification of sports bodies that attended the General Assembly meeting of the Federation referred to is not based on a valid basis of fact and law, and deserves to be ignored.

This is without prejudice to the fact that the Olympic Committee has no legal right to classify sports bodies, and that this is an inherent prerogative of the Federation’s Board of Directors, according to its bylaws. This is refuted by what was previously mentioned, that is, since the classification of sports bodies is the right of the Federation’s Board of Directors. However, this classification is not valid or reliable unless the Egyptian Olympic Committee approves it in accordance with the regulations and its statutes and the statutes of the Egyptian Squash Federation referred to previously when the two regulations required the classification to be approved by the Egyptian Olympic Committee, which is what actually happened by the decision issued by the head of the committee. Olympic on 9/26/2021.

• It is well established that the basis for ruling whether a procedure is invalid or not is whether or not the purpose of the procedure or form has been achieved, since the rules of form and procedures are not a goal in themselves, but rather they are procedures that serve the public interest and the interest of individuals alike. If the purpose of the procedure is achieved, If it is omitted, it will not be ruled invalid. This is the case, and since the purpose of mentioning the data that the Federation’s bylaws required to be included in the form for appointing the representative of the Sports Authority authorized to attend the General Assembly of the Federation is to authenticate and verify the authenticity of the authorization and its issuance by the Authority, and if this purpose is achieved Regarding the authorization issued by Smouha Sports Club to its representative who attended the Federation’s General Assembly meeting, the club did not claim that the authorization according to which the club’s representative attended the Federation’s General Assembly meeting was invalid.

Appealing the decision to announce the results of the elections for the Board of Directors of Smouha Sports Club does not legally entail restricting the hand of the Board of Directors from carrying out its duties and managing the club’s affairs in accordance with the provisions of the law and the club’s bylaws, and then the decision of the Board of Directors of the aforementioned club is to select and appoint the club’s representative. Attending the General Assembly of the Union is valid and clear of any defect in this regard, and accordingly, the presence of this delegate is valid and flawless in attending the General Assembly meeting of the Union as a representative of the club, especially after the Authority verified through the appeal documents that the representative of the aforementioned club is Who attended the union’s general assembly meeting.Judgment of The Egyptian sports settlement and arbitration center

🔅Judgment of The Egyptian sports settlement and arbitration center

In Arbitration No. 37 of 4 J of 2020, which concluded with: Suspending the implementation of the decision of the Board of Directors of Wadi Degla Sports Club, including the dismissal and cancellation of the membership of the appellant women, and here……

🔅Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court to appeal  No. 41175 of 67J

Article 21 of the Statute of Sports Clubs No. 929 of 2013 permits a branch member to acquire active membership in the original club on the condition that he pays the difference between what was paid for accepting membership in the branch and the amounts determined for accepting membership in the original club at the time of accepting membership in the branch if he submits a request for this within three years. From the date of gaining membership in the branch, otherwise he is obligated to pay the difference between what he paid in exchange for accepting membership in the branch and the amounts determined for accepting membership in the original club at the time of submitting the application.

Whereas the claimant fulfills the conditions and in light of the provisions of Article 111 of the Central Bank, Banking System and Monetary System Law No. 88 of 2003, which stipulates that:

The transaction within the Arab Republic of Egypt shall be purchasing and selling in the field of goods and services in Egyptian pounds… The court orders to cancel the decision of the administrative authority and the Heliopolis Sports Club – provided that the difference is calculated and paid at the time of accepting membership in the club’s Shorouk branch in Egyptian pounds.

🔅Judgment of the Court of Appeal – Circuit 1, Labor – to Appeal No. 4329 of 23 J Which ended with the appellant being compensated in the amount of 436,297 thousand pounds for unfair dismissal, and the amount of 82,788 thousand pounds for the notice period, and the amount of 51,052 thousand pounds in salary for the period from 1/1/2019 to 7/2/2019, and the amount of 152,674 pounds in exchange for the balance of his leave for 110 days and providing the worker with an unpaid experience certificate. indicating the date he joined the service, the date it ended, the type of work he was performing, the benefits and identification of his experience and professional competence, and the return of his appointment.

🔅Judgment of the 3rd Circuit: Cairo Economic Misdemeanor Appellant in Misdemeanor No. 508 of 2019, Cairo Economic Misdemeanor By fining the legal representative of the Cairo National Automobile Company with an amount of 100 thousand pounds, as well as an amount of 10 thousand pounds as temporary civil compensation, based on the examination of complaint No…. of damage to the engine of the plaintiff’s car, Mercedes C250, model 2012, and after the report of the Faculty of Engineering of Ain Shams, dated 19 /4/2017 There is a break in the connecting rod of one cylinder, there is a break in one of the intake valves in cylinder 4, a break in the piston and the cylinder wall, and there are leaks on the intake valves that are higher than normal, despite the fact that the center changed the cam timing unit about 3000 km before the engine was damaged.

🔅Judgment of the Cairo Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Civil, to Appeal No. 4345 of 137 J: The judge is that the dated sales contracts are valid and enforceable… based on the rejected photocopies that are the subject of the lawsuit, because even if the original is that copies of customary papers are not valid and have no value in proof except to the extent that they lead to the original, except that the opponent’s discussion of the subject of the documents whose copies were submitted in the lawsuit and his lack of dispute The fact that it was issued by him and his failure to verify its authenticity or conformity with its originals is considered an implicit acknowledgment of the conformity of the images to the original, which justifies taking them and relying on them, and it is not permissible for the opponent after that to deny them or deny the original from which they were taken.

 🔅The Judgment of the Cairo Court of Appeal, Circuit 1, Civil, in Appeals Nos. 7155 & 7464/23 J, filed by the Interior Sports Club against…

The judge based his judgement on respect for the judgement issued in appeal No. 64157 of 73, which ended until the dismissal of the appellant’s status against him, since he had issued a decision No. 263 of 2018 transferring it from the budget of the General Cabinet of the Ministry of Interior to the budget of the General Office of Cairo Governorate Accordingly, the appellant’s connection to the club has ceased to exist because the ruling has become final and conclusive due to the lack of appeal against it, which is what the court concludes with regarding the claimant request to renew his membership due to its expiration. It was based on no evidence, and since the court of first instance had disagreed with that consideration, the order with which the court decided to cancel The appealed judgment.

🔅The judgment of the Cairo Criminal Court, 19th District, South, in the grievance against the prohibition order issued to prevent Mrs. Mona Muhammad Abdel Sattar and her minor children from disposing of their funds in banks, as well as their real estate funds, in which the court ended by ending the prohibition order based on the statement issued by the Illicit Gains Department at the Ministry Justice and ending the effect of the ban on action.

🔅Ruling of the Cairo Criminal Court, Circuit 19, South Cairo, in the grievance against the prohibition of disposal order issued to prevent the late advisor/ Wael Shalabi, his wife, and his minor children from disposing of the deceased’s funds in accordance with the articles of Law No. 62 of 1975 regarding illicit gain, especially Article 14 bis (c) if the act was The problem with the crime of illegal gain…or stopping the implementation of the penalty permanently…results by force of law in the expiration of the criminal case…as well as the crimes of public funds stipulated in Chapter Four of Book Two of the Penal Code, and in light of the certificate issued by the illegal gain. The project: The court orders the termination of the prohibition order issued against Wael Saeed Abu Rawash.

🔅Judgment of The Egyptian sports settlement and arbitration center

In Arbitration No. 42 of 4 judicial year for the year 2020, which concluded with:

1. The decision of the Board of Directors of the Maadi Sports and Yacht Club (the respondent in its capacity) to dismiss the membership of the appellant issued at the aforementioned club’s Board of Directors meeting No. “60” held on 11/30/2020.
2. Because it violates the member’s right to defend himself during the alleged investigation hearings, especially since the club was unable to provide him with a reach letter, accordingly:
3. The plaintiff was not informed of the aforementioned investigation hearing so that he could attend and be able to present his defense of the facts attributed to him, which constitutes a violation of his right to defense.

🔅Judgment of The Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration In Arbitration No. 1189 of  2020, which concluded with:

– The shareholders’ agreement of 29/11/2016 is null and void for violating article 45 of the Egyptian Companies Law.

Based on:

The lack of seriousness of the shareholders’ agreement and its violation of the provisions of the law regulating joint stock companies, which do not permit the transfer of shares from the original claimant  to the original  respondent, since the company that was established on 8/24/2015 had not been in existence for two full years at the time of signing the shareholders’ agreement on 11/29/ 2016, and the claimant  originally concluded that what was previously stated leads to the invalidity of the shareholders’ agreement because it included the disposal of the company’s shares before the publication of two balance sheets and the calculation of profits and losses for two full years, because what is important in calculating the period stipulated in accordance with Article 45 of the Companies Law is the date Conclusion of the contract, Not the date of  the warning sent by the original respondent.

Therefore, all trading of these shares before the expiration of the prescribed period is considered invalid, in implementation of the provisions of Article 161 of the Companies Law No. 159 of 1981, as this invalidity occurs by force of law, but it is in the interest of adhering to it, and the court may rule on its own initiative. The legislator has decided a criminal penalty for violating the aforementioned prohibition in accordance with the text of Article 163 of the Companies Law. The claimant  originally concluded that the restrictions imposed on the principle of the authority of will are restrictions imposed on individuals in discussing the content of the contract and the clauses it may contain that are contrary to public order.

That means that the absolute freedom of the contractors is a mere illusion, and that the legislator, when stipulating in the article, (147) Of the Egyptian Civil Code, “pacta sunt servanda” means a contract in conformity with the provisions of the law, public order and public morals. If it is established that this Convention has violated the provisions of public order in Egypt, it is invalidated in its entirety.

🔅The issued principle in Case No. 1584 of 2013, Circuit (25) – Giza Court of First Instance

The power of attorney includes the phrase “shall not be revoked”. Hence, there is a presumed interest of the person issued with the power of attorney – and the plaintiff – for which that interest was added. That interest clearly indicates what was agreed to conclude the agreement in question by requiring the plaintiff to obtain half of the sums collected from it in pursuance of the arbitral award as its fees.

Hence, this necessitates the continuation of the validity of his agency until completion of implementation, which is what exists with the second case of the restriction imposed on the principal in dismissing the agent, which is stated in Article 715 Civil.

The Court then concludes that the plaintiff has an interest in that power of attorney, according to which the first defendant cannot unilaterally terminate the agency only on his part and the plaintiff has established his case on a valid basis of fact and law.

🔅Legal principles of certain provisions of the institution

1. Legal Principle of the Judgment No. 116 of 2023 Implementing the Cairo subjects:

That the booking in question is an executive booking under the hands of a third party in order to enforce a final judicial judgment. It was established to the court that the booking of a debtor with the third party’s advocacy bond signed on the claimants’ funds came in compliance with its tapes in accordance with the law, since the final judgment had been made on the nose of the statement And that the claimants’ money was seized to meet a certain amount of debt and performance status, The booking includes the claimed amount and type. The reservation has been booked with the record of a third party’s debtor as prescribed by the article. (328), (332) of the Code of Pleadings, which meets all its elements and requirements by law.

2. The legal principle of the judgement in Case No. 1090-Economic of 15J (Cairo Economic Court):

Article 308 (4) of the Trade Act stipulates that “If the balance of one of the joint account holders is booked, the booked share of the account balance shall be kept on the day the bank is notified of the booking. The bank shall suspend the withdrawal from the joint account, equal to the share reserved, and notify its owners or representatives of the reservation within a period not exceeding five days.”

It was established for the court that the decision to reserve and prevent disposal issued by the temporary order numbered in advance included the name of the claimant’s father among those included in that decision and did not include the name of the claimant, which is the matter from which the court concluded that the claimant was not subject to that decision and thus all her rights arising from the account were established. The subscriber within the limits of its 95% share, and if the defendant bank first violated this consideration, preventing the claimant from using all of its rights arising from that account within the limits of its 95% share, then it would be in clear violation of the text of the fourth paragraph of Article (308) of the Trade Law and Clause (C) From Paragraph (C) of Article Two of Chapter Three of the contract for opening the joint account between him, the claimant, and her father, and his refusal to implement the claimant’s instructions on that joint account within the limits of her share is without a valid basis in fact and in law, and then The court orders the claimant to oblige the bank to enable the claimant to recover the full amounts from the joint account No. 004……. Bank Audi, Waterway Branch, within the limits of her 95% share in it.

3. The legal principle from the judgment issued in Case No. 45346 of 75 BC (Administrative Judicial Court, Second Circuit):

As it is an arrangement based on the above, and since it is proven from the papers that the Bar Association has imposed on the claimants a fee of (25,050) pounds in exchange for authenticating the signature of the lawyer (Sherif Sayed Behairy) on the contract dated 9/1/2020 concluded between them for the purpose of establishing a joint liability company. “Al-Najah Private School in Maadi” (in order to be able to complete the month and document this contract with the Real Estate Registry Authority), and this fee was paid on 9/29/2020 according to Receipt No. 92004017, and the aforementioned law had no provisions that stated The text explicitly stipulates the imposition and increase of a fee for certifying the lawyer’s signature on contracts in accordance with the text of Articles No. (34) and (59) thereof. Therefore, the decision to impose and increase this fee becomes issued without the legal instrument that permits its imposition, issued in violation of the rule of law.

The Matter, which has the effect and consequence of the claimnts being entitled to recover what was collected from them as a fee in exchange for the defendant union’s ratification of the signature of the aforementioned lawyer, with which the court orders that the defendant union be obligated to return the amount (25,050) pounds that it collected from the plaintiffs as a fee for ratifying the lawyer’s signature on the referred to contract.

Without prejudice to this, what the Syndicate concealed by naming this amount under the name of a certification stamp in order to give it legitimacy. This is because, since the point in the correct classification is the reality of the matters and their content, not their names, and since the legislator specified it with conclusive texts in Articles No. (181), (182), (183), (184), (185) The provisions of the stamp and its categories, as it is one of the resources of the Social and Health Welfare Fund for Lawyers, and none of them included imposing a stamp on the union’s certification of the lawyer’s signature.

4. The legal principle from the judgment issued in Case No. 342 of 2020 (New Cairo Commercial):

Whereas the court’s evidence was from the expert’s attached report, which reached a conclusion (regarding reviewing the tax accounting and tax statements, the claimant submitted the tax returns submitted by him for the company’s main headquarters and branch to the competent tax office because it is entrusted with that because it is the main headquarters, which is It is obligatory to submit it to the Income Tax Office and the Value Added Tax Office for the years (2017/2021). However, nothing has been submitted indicating the final tax accounting for the conflict years (2017/2021) by the competent tax office, and confirmation that the main center has received all documents. Supporting the branch’s work is that the main center deducts withholding and collection taxes from the subcontractors based on the volume of extracts issued by them and their supply to the Tax Authority, which proves to the court that the defendant company did not fail to pay the taxes owed to it and that it sent those amounts to the claimant company, which sent them. To the competent authorities, which proves to the court that these requests were received in the wrong way, and the court rules to reject those requests as will be stated in the text.

As a guide to and as a result of the above, the current court, in a different form, in order to form its doctrine and show the face of truth in it, issued the aforementioned preliminary ruling referring the case to the expert’s office, and the expert submitted his report, in which he reached the conclusion that “and Based on the documents, analyses, and financial statements of the branch, the financial and accounting settlement was prepared, and its result showed that the main center had collected in excess of the total amounts (14,916,936 fourteen million nine hundred and sixteen thousand nine hundred and thirty-six pounds) over what was due. According to the contract, until the end of the fiscal year 2020.

The claimant company had proven that the defendant company’s liability was occupied by a debt that was due for payment before filing the lawsuit and the amount was specified in money, and the latter was present and did not express any defense or defense, since that was the case and the lawsuit papers had come devoid of anything indicating the establishment of the claimant company. It must pay that amount to the claimant company, and then its liability is busy by the claimed amount, and the claimant company’s request has coincided with the truth of reality and the law, requiring its response in its request, and this is what the court decides to oblige the defendant company to pay an amount of one hundred and nine. And forty million, one hundred and ninety-four thousand, five hundred and seven pounds, to the claimant company, as will be stated in the text.

The claimant’s company had filed its case in order to prosecute it. “The legal interest of the amount and its amount of 5% from the date of the claim” As the Court had previously listed, it concluded that the defendant company was obliged to pay the claimant company a denial of the statement. This amount arises from a business relationship and is therefore a commercial debt and the interest is 5% in accordance with article 226 of the Civil Code, According to the court, the interest is 5% from the date of the judicial claim and until the payment of the sum (149194507 one hundred and forty-nine million, one hundred and ninety-four thousand, five hundred and seven pounds).

5. The legal principle from the judgment  issued in Case No. 366 of 26 BC (Cairo Court of Appeal):

The holder of the cheque, despite its ageing claim for the value of the cheque pursuant to the preceding article, may claim the withdrawal, which has not been submitted in return for payment to the withholder, or has submitted it and then recovered it in its entirety or some of it on the basis of the invitation to enrichment without reason, since the withdrawal in this case unduly affected his account.

🔅The judgment of the 11th Circuit, fully commercial, in Case No. 273 of 2023 (New Cairo), which established several principles in its judgment regarding the request to dismiss the sole arbitrator in the arbitration case:

1. In no case shall a request for reply be submitted after 15 days’ notice of the request for reply.
2. The aforementioned period is not affected by the claim that there are judicial claims issued by the New Cairo Court regarding signature authenticity claims that were previously filed by the arbitrator in claims for the authenticity of the signature of drawn up contracts between the appellant and the respondent, because signature authenticity claims do not include claims related to this on the one hand and on the other hand. On the other hand, the plaintiff and the respondent agreed to appoint the sole arbitrator in the contracts of 3/7/2017 and 3/26/2017, and no serious circumstances arose that cast doubt on the arbitrator’s impartiality.
3. The lawsuit for the validity of the signature is a lawsuit in which the opponents do not dispute the substantive aspects of the contract. It is merely a precautionary lawsuit to ensure that the defendant signed the document and on it. The arbitrator’s directing it on behalf of one of the opponents does not affect his impartiality.