Los apoderamientos electrónicos de la Ley de Emprendedores

Laburpena

There is a close linkage between the data entering the Companies Registry and the effects it generates. The assumption that the Registry’s information is correct is based on the public deed. Therefore, it would be difficult to justify entries in the Registry based on private documents such as electronic powers of attorney carrying a recognized electronic signature. The electronic signature by itself does not guarantee that the person using it be its holder, unlike the notary’s participation, that guarantees the authenticity, capacity, absence of defects and informed nature of the consent. Hence the need to limit the objective scope of the regulation to relationships with Government Agencies, and in that regard it is crucial to systematically locate it in a chapter called “Simplification of administrative burdens”. In no event may it be implemented in other fields or allow making entries in the Companies Registry. It cannot be the case that the Entrepreneur Act abrogates section 1.280.5 of the Civil Code. If any administrative body such as the Directorate General for Registers and Notaries would give in to the temptation to issue a directive establishing the general interpretation that the Entrepreneur Act has tacitly abrogated section 1.208.5 of the Civil Code, such directive, in addition to being patently unlawful, would be completely futile. Moreover, as opposed to the copy of the power of attorney, which is legally sufficient to vouch for legal representation, the Registry’s certificate only proves that at the time of issue and not subsequently, the material sources of the publicity could be displayed. If a public deed based on one of these electronic powers of attorney were to be executed, the said deed would not have its regular legal implications or the conveying and executory effects arising from section 517 of the Civil Procedure Rules.