Kuwait Court of Cassation principle number 2457

The limitation period as between principal and representative. It does not run so long as the representation continues. The reason therefor. The representative's possession of the principal's property is precarious possession and for the principal's own account. - The agent's—or representative's—completion of performance of the agency or representation. Its effect. He must submit a detailed account to the principal supported by documents. This obligation does not lapse unless the principal clearly and unequivocally exempts him from it or the nature of the transaction or the circumstances require such exemption. The burden of proving those circumstances. It falls upon the agent or representative. - The judgment's acceptance of the plea that the action could not be heard because more than ten years had elapsed between the date of sale of the shares and the bringing of the action, based on denying the company's agency for the appellant in selling the shares, despite proof of that representation, which necessarily entailed that the limitation period did not run pursuant to Article 446/1 of the Civil Code, and its continuation in the absence of proof that the company had submitted a statement of account supported by documents, the burden of proving which lay upon it, while its possession of his funds continued to be precarious possession and for his account. An error in the application of the law requiring its cassation.