Commercial disputes in Egypt are won on the file before they are won in court. The governing framework is the Civil and Commercial Procedure Law promulgated by Law No. 13 of 1968, as amended, together with the Evidence Law promulgated by Law No. 25 of 1968, the Commercial Code promulgated by Law No. 17 of 1999, the Economic Courts Law No. 120 of 2008 as amended by Law No. 156 of 2024, and the Arbitration Law No. 27 of 1994. This article reads that framework in practical terms: the transaction record, the evidence rules, limitation, the division of jurisdiction, the payment order route, the EGP 500,000 cassation threshold, and settlement drafting.
Reconstruct the transaction before choosing a route
An Egyptian commercial dispute starts with the contract, its amendments, purchase orders and performance records. Date what was promised, delivered, accepted, invoiced and challenged, and separate agreed fact from allegation and from what still needs proof. Identify the parties and signatories in the actual agreements: a group company named on an invoice may not be the contractual counterparty, and in Egyptian practice the identity of the correct defendant decides service, jurisdiction and ultimately enforcement. Where acceptance or delivery is implied rather than signed, separate the inference from the record and look for the contemporaneous document that supports it.
Preserve full emails and messages rather than screenshots, keep originals of delivery and acceptance evidence, and restrict edits to copies so that files and metadata remain intact. Record gaps rather than reconstructing them. Build a chronology with columns for agreed fact, disputed allegation, supporting document and missing evidence, and flag translation needs early, because proceedings are conducted in Arabic.
The evidence rules that decide commercial cases
The Evidence Law allocates the means of proof, and its thresholds shape intake. Article 60 provides that, outside commercial matters, witness testimony is not admissible to prove the existence or extinguishment of a disposition whose value exceeds one thousand Egyptian pounds or is undetermined, unless an agreement or a text provides otherwise. Article 61 adds that even below that value, witnesses may not prove what contradicts or exceeds the content of written evidence. The written contract and its annexes therefore form the spine of any civil claim.
Commercial matters sit differently. Article 69 of the Commercial Code permits commercial obligations to be proved by all means of proof, whatever their value, unless the law provides otherwise, so merchants may rely on invoices, ledgers, correspondence, witnesses and presumptions. That freedom is not a reason to be casual: judges weigh contemporaneous commercial documents far above reconstructed accounts, and our standing advice is to convert every material variation into a signed or attributable writing when it is made. Between merchants, orderly books and consistent correspondence often decide the case before argument begins.
Commercial books and the duty to keep the record
The Commercial Code imposes its own preservation duties. Article 26 obliges the merchant, or the merchant's heirs, to keep the commercial books and the documents supporting their entries for five years from the date the book is marked closed, and to keep copies of correspondence for five years from sending or receipt, with microfilm or electronic copies carrying the force of originals where the regulatory conditions are met. These records are routinely the only contemporaneous account of delivery, acceptance and payment in a supply or distribution dispute.
The retention duty is shorter than the limitation periods below, which creates a practical trap: a claim can still be alive after the statutory books may lawfully be discarded. Businesses with recurring counterparty exposure should keep transactional records for the life of the potential claim, not merely for the statutory minimum, and should reconcile the books to invoices and bank movements so that the file presented to counsel, and later to the court or its expert, is internally consistent.
Limitation clocks that run while you negotiate
Egyptian law gives commercial claimants a defined runway. Article 68 of the Commercial Code provides that actions arising from obligations of merchants towards one another, relating to their commercial transactions, prescribe after seven years from the date the obligation falls due, unless the law provides otherwise, and that final judgments in those actions themselves lapse after ten years. Outside the merchant-to-merchant relationship, the general rule of the Civil Code applies, under which the action prescribes after fifteen years. Shorter special periods attach to particular claims, so the clock must be identified claim by claim, and recorded in the claim schedule with the due date and the last safe filing date.
Negotiation does not suspend the clock by itself. Where limitation approaches, a formal demand or the commencement of proceedings must be timed deliberately, and any standstill must be documented. Article 69's freedom of proof does not revive a time-barred claim, and a payment order, discussed below, is no answer to a debt the debtor can meet with a prescription defense. We treat the limitation audit as part of the intake file, not as a question for the day before filing.
The court map: partial, first instance, appeal, cassation
Ordinary commercial actions under Law No. 13 of 1968 begin before the partial courts for smaller claims or the plenary courts of first instance for larger ones, within their territorial jurisdiction. The action is commenced by a writ deposited with the court clerk under Article 63, stating the parties, the facts, the grounds and the claims, and served on the defendant; Article 66 sets the appearance period at fifteen days before the courts of first instance and appeal and eight days before the partial courts, reducible in cases of necessity. Judgments are appealable to the courts of appeal, and points of law go to the Court of Cassation, whose rulings are final.
Appeal in Egypt is a genuine second hearing: the appeal court re-examines fact and law, and the parties may supplement the record within the rules. Under Article 227 the appeal window is forty days from the judgment in most cases, and missing it ends the right. Two further features shape commercial files: courts of first instance and appeal commonly appoint experts in technically heavy disputes, a phase that often drives the timetable, and urgent interim measures go to the summary judge, whose orders are made quickly on the material presented. A defendant should raise jurisdiction and capacity objections in the first defense, because some cannot be raised later.
The economic courts and the EGP 15 million line
Law No. 120 of 2008 established economic courts with exclusive jurisdiction over disputes arising from the application of an exhaustively listed set of laws, including the companies, capital market, banking, intellectual property, consumer protection, telecommunications and restructuring and bankruptcy legislation, the last under Law No. 11 of 2018. Ordinary supply and service disputes between merchants generally remain with the ordinary courts, but any dispute touching the listed statutes must be channeled to the economic courts, and filing in the wrong forum costs time.
Under Article 6 of Law No. 120 of 2008, as replaced by Law No. 156 of 2024 (in force from 11 July 2024), the first instance chambers of the economic courts hear cases whose value does not exceed fifteen million Egyptian pounds, while the appellate chambers hear cases above that value or of unassessable value. Law No. 146 of 2019 introduced electronic filing through a registered online registry. For businesses, the practical points are to classify the claim against the jurisdictional list before filing, to value it realistically, and to prepare the electronic file to the registry's standards, since the economic courts run a notably more digitized process than the ordinary courts.
The EGP 500,000 cassation threshold
Cassation in Egypt is limited to points of law: the Court of Cassation does not re-hear the facts, and a challenge must be built on an error in the application or interpretation of the law. Access is now rationed by value. Law No. 157 of 2024 amended Article 248 of the Civil and Commercial Procedure Law and raised the value threshold for a cassation appeal in civil and commercial matters, so that the claim value must exceed five hundred thousand Egyptian pounds, applying to cases filed on or after 1 October 2024; cases filed before that date remain under the previous threshold of two hundred and fifty thousand pounds set by Law No. 191 of 2020. Cases whose value cannot be assessed remain outside the threshold.
The strategic consequence is significant: for claims below the threshold, the appeal judgment is effectively final, so the appellate record must be built with the same care once reserved for cassation. Claim valuation should therefore be considered at filing, not at the end of the road, and a claimant who can frame relief that is not susceptible of valuation, where the law genuinely allows it, preserves access to the Court of Cassation. We now treat the cassation map as part of the initial route assessment in every Egyptian commercial file.
The payment order route
For a right that is fixed in writing, due and consisting of a determined sum of money or a specified movable, the Civil and Commercial Procedure Law offers the payment order as an exceptional route that bypasses the ordinary stages of commencing an action. Article 201 and the following articles condition the order on written proof of the debt and on a prior demand for payment, and the debtor may lodge a grievance against the order, which turns the matter into a contested claim. The route is fast where the paper is clean and unforgiving where it is not.
In practice the payment order suits undisputed documented debts: a signed acknowledgment of debt, an accepted final account, a bounced check within its statutory framework, or a settlement instrument that fixes the sum. A contested invoice, a unilaterally prepared statement of account or a claim needing expert quantification will usually fail the requirement of a determined written right, and belongs in an ordinary action. Where the documents qualify, the payment order compresses months of procedure into weeks and pairs well with conservatory attachment over the debtor's assets.
Interim relief and preserving assets
A claimant who waits for a final judgment before thinking about assets may win a paper victory. The summary judge grants urgent interim measures, including conservatory attachment over the debtor's funds and movables where there is a genuine fear of dissipation, on applications that are decided quickly on the material presented. The application must show the underlying right and the urgency, which is another reason the intake file matters: the debt instrument, the default and the indicia of dissipation should be assembled before the application is drafted.
The defendant's side is equally structured: an attachment can be challenged, security can be offered, and the merits answered in the main action. Creditors should map the debtor's banks, counterparties and inventory before applying, because an attachment that names the wrong garnishee achieves little, and debtors should know which local assets are visible. Where a foreign judgment or award is the basis of the claim, recognition and enforcement require a separate application to the competent first instance court, and the conditions for exequatur should be assessed before enforcement spending begins.
Arbitration as the contract route
The Arbitration Law No. 27 of 1994, modeled on the UNCITRAL Model Law, governs arbitration in civil and commercial matters. Under Article 12 the arbitration agreement must be in writing, whether as a clause or a separate agreement, and under Article 23 the arbitration clause is treated as independent of the contract that contains it. The tribunal may grant interim measures, and the award is enforceable; recourse is by an action for annulment on the exhaustively listed grounds in Article 53, brought within ninety days of notification of the award under Article 54.
Choosing between the courts and arbitration is a record question as much as a legal one. Arbitration suits technically complex or cross-border disputes where the parties want a private process and a chosen tribunal, while the courts offer the summary judge and the state's enforcement machinery without tribunal costs. A clause review before signature should test scope, seat, language and institution, and a dispute review before escalation should confirm that the clause covers the parties and claims at stake, because an entity that signed only a variation may sit outside the arbitration agreement in the head contract.
Documenting settlement so the file actually closes
Most Egyptian commercial disputes end in compromise, and the settlement document decides whether the dispute stays closed. A settlement is itself a contract: identify the parties with the same care as the underlying agreement, state the settled sums and payment dates, define the released claims, deal with continuing performance, and say what happens on default. Where proceedings are on foot, costs and the withdrawal of appeals must be dealt with expressly, and a settlement reached before a court or an appointed expert should be recorded in the form that preserves its enforceability.
Before signature, test the numbers against the claim schedule, confirm the signatory's authority to bind the releasing entity, and keep principal, fees, credits and disputed deductions on separate lines so partial default can be identified without fresh dispute. Where payment is phased, consider security, promissory instruments within their statutory framework, or an arbitration clause covering the settlement itself. We draft the default clause first and the release second: a release is only as strong as its enforcement mechanism.
What we review in an Egyptian commercial dispute file
When we review an Egyptian dispute file, we begin with the parties and the instruments: which entity signed, who accepted the variations, and whether the right is fixed in writing within the meaning of the payment order articles. We audit the evidence against Articles 60 and 61 of the Evidence Law and the retention duties of Article 26 of the Commercial Code, map limitation under Article 68, and test the dispute clause against the parties and claims actually involved. We then assess the route: ordinary courts or economic courts, payment order where the paper qualifies, summary relief where assets are at risk, the realistic appellate path under the EGP 500,000 cassation threshold, and enforcement, so that escalation is decided with recovery and timetable in view.
See also: our Egypt commercial and corporate guide and our Egypt Investment Law 72 guide, plus our commercial and corporate practice.
Frequently asked questions
How long do I have to sue on a commercial debt in Egypt?
Under Article 68 of the Commercial Code, actions on obligations between merchants relating to their commercial transactions prescribe after seven years from the due date unless the law provides otherwise, while the Civil Code's general rule is fifteen years, so the clock for each claim must be checked individually.
Can I rely on witnesses to prove a commercial deal in Egypt?
In commercial matters, yes: Article 69 of the Commercial Code permits proof of commercial obligations by all means whatever their value. Outside commercial matters, Article 60 of the Evidence Law bars witness proof above one thousand pounds, and Article 61 protects written evidence from contradiction by witnesses.
When is the payment order route available?
Under Article 201 and the following articles of the Civil and Commercial Procedure Law, it serves a right fixed in writing that is due and consists of a determined sum of money or a specified movable, after a prior demand for payment; the debtor may grieve against the order.
Must my commercial case go to the economic courts?
Only if it arises from one of the laws exclusively listed in Law No. 120 of 2008, such as the companies, capital market, banking or bankruptcy statutes. As amended by Law No. 156 of 2024, first instance chambers hear cases up to fifteen million pounds and appellate chambers above that value.
Can every commercial judgment reach the Court of Cassation?
No. Under Law No. 157 of 2024, cassation in civil and commercial matters requires a claim value exceeding five hundred thousand pounds for cases filed on or after 1 October 2024, or exceeding two hundred and fifty thousand for earlier cases, unless the claim cannot be valued.
Is arbitration enforceable in Egypt?
Yes. Under the Arbitration Law No. 27 of 1994, a written arbitration agreement is valid and the award enforceable; annulment is confined to the grounds in Article 53 and must be sought within ninety days of notification under Article 54.
How long must an Egyptian business keep its commercial records?
Article 26 of the Commercial Code requires the commercial books and supporting documents to be kept for five years from closing, and correspondence copies for five years, but the seven-year prescription period makes longer retention prudent.
Do you handle commercial disputes in Egypt?
Yes. Our Cairo office reviews the contract and the record, advises on route and timing, conducts litigation before the ordinary and economic courts, payment order and enforcement proceedings, and drafts settlements. Contact us through our contact page to discuss your matter.