Supreme Court: when handwriting expert examination becomes the key evidence of signature authenticity

The Supreme Court emphasizes that determining whether a signature on a document is genuine falls outside the court’s competence and belongs to the sphere of specialized knowledge, therefore in most cases an appropriate proof of the authenticity of a signature is the conclusion of a forensic handwriting examination. It is this conclusion that enables the court to objectively assess whether the signature was made by a particular person or by someone else and often becomes a key element of the evidentiary basis in disputes over the validity of contracts, receipts, wills or other transactions.​

Significance of the Supreme Court’s position
The Supreme Court consistently proceeds from the premise that a proper proof of the origin of a signature is the conclusion of a forensic handwriting examination, since the issue of authenticity requires specialized knowledge and cannot be decided “by eye” or solely on the parties’ testimony. The absence of such a conclusion or the disregard of an examination already carried out is often regarded as a significant procedural violation and a ground for quashing decisions of lower courts. At the same time, even a “strong” expert opinion must be assessed together with other evidence and cannot automatically predetermine the outcome of the dispute; if the examination was conducted in breach of procedure, the court may find it inadmissible evidence and decline to rely on it in its decision.​

When handwriting examination is indispensable
The practice of the Supreme Court highlights several typical situations in which a refusal to order a forensic handwriting examination is considered a judicial error:

1. A dispute over the validity of a contract or a receipt where one of the parties directly denies having signed the document. In such cases, references by the court to the “visual similarity” of signatures or to the absence of a renewed motion by the party after an initial refusal to appoint an examination are considered insufficient.​
2. A situation where there are two competing documents (for example, different versions of a contract or a will) and only one of them bears a signature whose authenticity is disputed. Without an expert study it is practically impossible to establish which document reflects the true will of the person.​
3. Criminal proceedings concerning document forgery, where the very fact that a signature was executed by another person constitutes an element of the offence. In such cases the expert’s conclusion determines whether there are grounds for prosecution or, on the contrary, for acquittal.​

In similar disputes, the Supreme Court indicates that courts are obliged either to appoint an examination or to provide reasoned explanations as to why the issue can be resolved on the basis of other evidence. A merely formal refusal (“no funds for the examination”, “the parties’ explanations are sufficient”) without analysing the importance of such evidence for the outcome of the case is regarded as a violation of the right to a fair trial.​

Requirements for an expert opinion
The Supreme Court not only recognises forensic handwriting examinations as key evidence but also sets criteria for their admissibility. Among the basic requirements are the following:​

• the examination must be carried out by an expert or institution with appropriate qualifications and certification;​
• the basis for the examination must be a proper procedural decision (a court ruling, a decision of an investigator, or an agreement with an expert in the case of a “private” examination) adopted by a competent authority;​
• the objects of the study must be original documents or proper signature and handwriting samples that enable the expert to provide a categorical or a probabilistic conclusion.​

If, for example, an examination is conducted on the basis of poor-quality copies, without a sufficient number of samples, or the expert exceeds the scope of authority (by evaluating the legal validity of the document rather than just the signature), the court may dismiss such a conclusion as inadmissible or improper evidence. In doing so, the court must explain why exactly the conclusion cannot be taken into account and, if necessary, order a repeat or additional examination.​

The parties’ duty to facilitate the examination
If the court orders a forensic handwriting examination but a party fails to provide signature samples, does not pay for the study, or does not ensure access to the originals, that party bears the risk of negative procedural consequences: such conduct may be considered bad faith, its objections regarding the signature may be regarded as unfounded, and the document may be considered properly signed. By contrast, a bona fide initiator of the examination who provides samples and documents in advance usually receives the Supreme Court’s support if lower courts, without appropriate reasoning, refuse to order an examination. This sends a signal to practitioners: an active, well-documented position on evidentiary issues works in favour of the party, whereas passivity or merely formal motions without real cooperation may result in defeat.​

Is it possible to do without an examination
Despite the fact that the conclusion of a forensic handwriting examination is recognised as appropriate and, as a rule, key evidence of the origin of a signature, the Supreme Court allows exceptions. If, for objective reasons, it is impossible to obtain the original document (it has been lost, destroyed, is located abroad, etc.), the court cannot make the resolution of the dispute depend solely on the absence of an examination. In such situations, the origin of the signature is assessed together with other evidence: the parties’ conduct after concluding the contract, performance of obligations, payment documents, correspondence, witness statements and so on.​

Thus, an examination is a priority but not an absolutely irreplaceable tool. The key factor remains the principle of free evaluation of evidence and the court’s duty to establish the parties’ true intentions.​

Practical tips for litigants

1. If you question your signature on a document, immediately initiate a forensic handwriting examination and make sure to provide “reference” signature samples. This demonstrates good faith and facilitates the work of both the court and the expert.​
2. When entering into important agreements (loans, pledges, leases, corporate agreements, wills), keep the original documents and control who has access to them. Losing the original complicates protection and may make an examination impossible.​
3. When your opponent submits an examination in their favour, analyse its admissibility: the expert’s authority, methodology, sufficiency of samples, and compliance with procedural rules. If there are doubts, initiate a review or a repeat examination.​
4. Prepare a parallel body of evidence: payment documents, correspondence, certificates of completed works, witness statements. Even if the examination’s results are unfavourable, this evidence may lead the court to conclude that the contract was in fact performed.​

Conclusions
In a typical situation, the proper and key proof of the origin of a signature is the conclusion of a forensic handwriting examination, because establishing the authenticity of a signature belongs to the sphere of specialized knowledge and cannot be replaced by the court’s “life experience” or the parties’ subjective assessments. At the same time, its findings must comply with procedural requirements, be evaluated together with other evidence, and in exceptional cases may be replaced by a set of indirect evidence. For practitioners this means the need to take care in advance of proper primary documentation, to carefully initiate and verify examinations, and to record the actual performance of contracts, turning forensic handwriting examinations from a risk into an effective tool for the protection of rights.​

Author: Yevhenii Murchenko, Head of the Criminal Law and Procedure Practice of the law firm “WINNER”. If you have questions or problems related to challenging the validity of a signature, the appointment or conduct of a forensic handwriting examination, the preparation of evidence, or defence in related court disputes, contact the team of specialists for professional assistance.