One of the most difficult legal situations is to hold a contract or deed, then have your opponent stand before the judge and deny that the signature is theirs, or that the document is forged. Here the battle shifts from the original dispute to a battle over proving the validity of the document itself. The Law of Evidence regulated this situation precisely, and distinguished between two different cases, each with its own procedures: denial of handwriting or signature, and a claim of forgery. Here is a practical guide explaining the difference and what to do in each case.
The fundamental difference: denial of handwriting versus a claim of forgery
This is the first point you must understand, because it determines the entire path:
A claim of forgery applies to both official and ordinary instruments. That is, one may claim the forgery of a notarized deed or an ordinary contract.
Denial of handwriting, seal, signature, or fingerprint applies only to the ordinary instrument. An official instrument is not denied, but is challenged by forgery exclusively.
Who bears the burden of proof? A decisive point
Here is a very important difference in the allocation of the burden:
In a claim of forgery: the one claiming forgery bears the burden of proving their claim. That is, whoever says "this is forged" must prove it.
In denial of the issuance of an ordinary instrument: the opposite — whoever denies that the instrument issued from them (or whose heir denies it, or who denies knowledge of it), the burden falls on their opponent to prove that the instrument issued from them or their predecessor.
Why does this difference matter to you?
If you hold an ordinary contract and the other party denies their signature, the burden shifts to you to prove the signature's validity. For this reason, the more your document is officially notarized or supported by strong presumptions (witnesses to the signing, correspondence confirming it), the stronger your position upon denial.
How is signature validity proven? Handwriting verification
If the opponent denies their handwriting or signature, and you remain holding the instrument, and it is productive in the dispute, and the facts of the case do not suffice to convince the court of its validity — the court orders verification by comparison (matching the handwriting against known samples), or hearing witnesses, or both.
Comparison is done against documents suitable for comparison, such as: signatures on official instruments, the part the opponent acknowledges as valid, or the opponent's handwriting written before the court directly (dictation/exemplar).
An important point: whoever disputes the validity of the instrument must attend in person for the dictation at the appointed time. If they refuse to attend without excuse, or attend and refuse to write, the court may rule the instrument valid. That is, evading the dictation turns against the denier.
Procedures for a claim of forgery
A claim of forgery may be made at any stage of the case. The claimant must precisely specify: the alleged places of forgery, its evidence, and the requested investigation procedures. Then, if the court finds the claim productive and admissible, it orders investigation by comparison or witnesses.
An important effect: the order to investigate forgery suspends the instrument's validity for enforcement (while precautionary procedures remain). That is, merely investigating the forgery of a deed temporarily freezes its enforcement.
The court also has an exceptional power: it may — even if forgery was not claimed before it — rule the instrument rejected and void if it appears clearly from its condition or the circumstances of the case that it is forged, provided it states the presumptions it relied upon.
Beware: false denial or claim has a price
The law set a serious financial deterrent against abuse:
If the instrument is ruled valid in its entirety after being denied, the one who denied it is fined no more than ten thousand riyals, without prejudice to the injured party's right to compensation.
Likewise, if the claim of forgery is rejected or the claimant's right lapses, they are fined no more than ten thousand riyals, without prejudice to compensation. And if the forgery is actually proven, the court refers the instrument to the Public Prosecution to take criminal procedures.
A practical point
Do not deny a signature you know is yours, and do not claim forgery out of malice — for the result may be a fine and compensation, even a criminal referral if the contrary is proven. Conversely, if you are a victim of genuine forgery, the law gives you effective tools to prove it and suspend the enforcement of the forged document.
The original forgery action: don't wait to be attacked
An important preventive feature: one who fears being confronted with a forged instrument may take the initiative and sue whoever holds this instrument and whoever benefits from it — without waiting for the document to be raised against them. This allows you to take the initiative to void a forged document before it is used against you.
Conclusion
Signature denial and a claim of forgery are powerful weapons, but they rebound on whoever misuses them. The key is to know your path: denying handwriting on an ordinary instrument is one thing, and claiming forgery is another, each with its own burden and procedure. The golden rule: officially document your important signatures or have them witnessed where possible — for the more your document is notarized, the harder it is to deny, and the burden shifts off your shoulders.
How does LEXIUM help?
We represent you whether you face a denial of a valid signature, are a victim of a forged document, or are wrongly accused of forgery — we determine the correct procedural path, prepare the proof or challenge file, and manage the handwriting-verification and forgery-action procedures to protect your position.
This topic is procedurally precise and each case has its own details, so consulting a specialist is advised before taking any step in denial or a claim of forgery.
Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. See our full disclaimer.