The importance of this cannot be over-emphasized. Obviously, you don`t want a company to say that they don`t have to abide by the contract because it was signed by someone who wasn`t allowed to do so. Therefore, if the other party is a corporation, you need to be sure that the corporation does exist, that the person signing on behalf of the corporation has the authority to do so, and that the contract has been approved by the shareholders or directors of the corporation. For this reason, contracts often contain a provision stating that “the parties may perform this contract in consideration, each of which is considered original and all of which form a single agreement”. But can we say that this is just as important for a party that was solely responsible for the preparation of the document? Some may argue that the signing of the document by such a party has little or no purpose, perhaps outside of one of formal completeness. It could therefore be argued that, in Roberts/Martin 2005 (4) SA 163 (C), the Tribunal adopted a more correct approach, in which it found that an agreement not signed by the respondent`s lawyers constituted an offer by the respondent accepted by the applicant by signing the agreement. The Court found that the parties had concluded a “provisional” agreement through their respective services (payment by Zulu and delivery by cell C) which would only be replaced by the written agreement once signed by both parties.