header-logo header-logo

04 September 2019
Issue: 7854 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Commercial
printer mail-detail

E-signing is fine, say commissioners

Electronic signatures are a valid alternative to handwritten signatures, the Law Commission has confirmed.

In a report published this week, the commission explains why e-signatures are viable way to execute documents and deeds, including where there is a statutory requirement for a signature, and makes recommendations for reform to address issues surrounding their use.

The commission notes the flexibility of common law in recognising a range of types of signature, including an ‘X’, initials, a printed name and a description of the signatory such as ‘Your loving mother’. Moreover, the commission states, the courts have accepted e-signatures including name typed at the bottom of an email or clicking an ‘I accept’ tick box. These decisions supplement the EU eIDAS regulation, which states that e-signatures cannot be denied legal validity simply because they are electronic.

Stephen Lewis, Commercial and Common Law Commissioner, said: ‘Electronic signatures can offer quicker and easier transactions for businesses and consumers.

‘Our report aims to provide an accessible statement of the law.’

However, the commission also identifies concerns, including that e-signatures may be more susceptible to fraud, which could put vulnerable people at risk. There are also issues of reliability and security of the technology involved and the question of remote witnessing―the commission’s view is that the current law does not allow for remote witnessing via video link.

It recommends that an industry working group be set up to provide best practice guidance, including on video witnessing, followed by legislative reform. It calls for a future review of the law of deeds and points out that the government may wish to codify the law on e-signatures to make the law more accessible.

Issue: 7854 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Commercial
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll