Talk:Procuration

Levels of procuration

German business law recognises different levels of authorisation. An assistant may sign i.A. (im Auftrag = on orders from), a higher ranking officer may sign i.V. (in Vertretung = in place of) and a Prokurist, who has full legal powers of representation, signs ppa (per procura). Do such distinctions exist elsewhere? 78.48.147.143 12:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've always been down that the pp is suppose to go after the name not before it :S —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.0.3 (talk) 14:36, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of idle curiosity...

How did Joe Bloggs become a Johannes in Latin? Wouldn't he be a Josephus? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.85.180.34 (talk) 14:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per proc.

The text "per procurationem" is inconsistent with Black's Law Dictionary, which has "per procuratione." See the definition for "Procuration." 24.123.57.42 (talk) 14:18, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not define the use of Prokura, and the person holding a Procura. As far as I know it is regulated by law in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and the Nordic countries. If you are registered as having Prokura, an official registry with the authorities, in a certain company, you have by law regulated power to bind the company for business transactions regarding all normal business in regard to third parties. The limits of the Prokura is stipulated by law and can not be reduced by decisions of the company in regards to a third party, the Prokura either is or not. It can be registered that two person need to sign together for the Prokura. The person holding a Prokura, is called Prokurist in German.Jochum (talk) 12:10, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Different interpretations

One interpretation is

"—The Emperor, [signed] on behalf [of whom by] The Imperial Envoy"

Another is

"—The Imperial Envoy, [signing] on behalf [of] The Emperor"

Therefore I do not see how the following statement in the article is logical: However, this would mean that two people signed the letter, one in his own person, one "by the agency of another" (without that other being expressly indicated).
That seems to require a fanciful interpretation like:

"—Adam Adamson (Acme Corp.), [and also, signing] on behalf [of an unspecified party,] Björk Bjarnadóttir (Pinnacle Ltd.)."

That seems like an unlikely interpretation to me. Are there any real-life exemplars of this that can be cited?
—DIV (120.18.65.198 (talk) 00:59, 28 January 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Abbreviation to "per"

I faintly recall seeing signature blocks prepended with just "per", which — based on the present article — could have been an ellipsis consistent with shortening the English "through the agency of" to just "through". Although at the time I fancied it was intended to mean "for" (that is, "acting on behalf of" or "representing"). If anyone can find a reliable reference for such usage, I suggest it be added to the article.
—DIV (120.17.80.125 (talk) 03:04, 28 August 2018 (UTC))[reply]