According to the current decision, Ref. No. 2 As 255/2015, it applies that if an administrative body has doubts as to the existence of authorization, a Power of Attorney with a submission sent via a data box must be either signed through a certified electronic signature of the principal, or this must be an authorized conversion output. In other cases, submitting a copy or sending a scan of the Power of Attorney by email is sufficient.In the given matter, an entirely passive party to the proceedings received a disciplinary penalty for failure to provide an explanation. The only "act" that had been carried out in the proceedings up to that point was an appeal submitted via a data box of the party, but it was signed by the Executive Officer of a commercial company. The message also included Power of Attorney without a certified electronic signature or certification clause of an authorized document conversion.
In the subsequent proceedings, the party invoked the case law of the Supreme Administrative Court, according to which it was sufficient to submit Power of Attorney in a plain copy several times. The Supreme Administrative Court thus had to explain that the scan of the Power of Attorney sent via email is only based on equal footing with the copy of Power of Attorney for proving authorization if the condition is fulfilled that it is evident from the Power of Attorney and subsequent submissions of the authorized representative that he or she was familiarized with the matter, and that the Power of Attorney also included the personal data of the complainant (date of birth, residence), the correct file number and reference number of the summons, as well as data of time and place of the oral hearing.
