Electronic signatures can take several forms, including: the case is a direct follow-up to the Commission`s report on the «electronic execution of documents», in which the Commission considers that electronic signatures (electronic signatures) are valid and can, in most cases, be used for the execution of documents as an alternative to wet signatures. They can also be used as evidence. However, there remains a problem with the acts and the requirement that they be testified. The law requires that a document be signed in the presence of a witness confirming the signature, in other words, the witness must be physically present. Currently, the law does not allow any remote testimony. Cross-border transactions and documents will require more diligence. This case reflects modernity and the abandonment of a traditional conception of a contract signature (Denning LJ: «He must write on it with his own hand»). However, the possibility of a contract being accidentally created by names and other details, which are automatically inserted into the email as a footer, should set off alarm bells for senders of electronic communications. It stresses the importance of ensuring that correspondence is correctly identified in order to prevent it from being accidentally binding, whether by e-mail or postal communication. But caution is also needed for standard phrases such as «against contracts», which are not necessarily a panacea.

The Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (E-Sign Act) of 2000 allows the use of electronic records in consumer contracts as long as the consumer has given consent to their use. It states that any law that provides for a signature may be complied with by an electronic signature and that electronically executed agreements may be presented as evidence in court. . . .


Comments are closed.