How does the court determine the authenticity and validity of an electronic contract in the event of a dispute?

When signing an electronic contract, most people are still most concerned about whether the electronic contract has legal effect? Can electronic contracts be used as judicial evidence? How can the court verify the validity of an electronic contract in the event of a dispute? Based on the relevant laws and regulations currently issued by the country, reliable electronic signatures and contracts not only have the same legal effect as handwritten signatures and paper contracts, but can also be used as evidence in court.

· Reliable electronic signatures have the same legal effect as handwritten signatures or seals.

-- Electronic Signature Law of the People's Republic of China

· The legal effect of documents with electronic signatures or data messages agreed upon by the parties shall not be denied solely because they are in the form of electronic signatures or data messages.

-- Civil Code of the People's Republic of China

· Evidence includes: statements from the parties involved; Documentary evidence; Physical evidence; Audiovisual materials; Electronic data; Witness testimony; Appraisal opinion; Investigation transcript.

-- Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China

· If the electronic data submitted by the parties can prove its authenticity through electronic signature, trusted timestamp, hash value verification, blockchain and other technical means of evidence collection, fixation and tamper proof, or through the authentication of the electronic evidence collection and storage platform, the Internet court shall confirm it.

-- Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Cases by Internet Courts

· Evidence materials such as physical evidence, documentary evidence, audio-visual materials, and electronic data collected by administrative agencies during administrative law enforcement and case investigation, which have been verified by the court to be true and the collection procedures comply with relevant laws and administrative regulations, can be used as the basis for determining the case. Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China. However, in the judicial rulings of the court, not all; Electronic signature document; All of them can be used as judicial evidence. According to relevant laws and regulations, the court must comply with the "; Contract generation and signature process, storage and transmission methods, content integrity, etc; After comprehensive evaluation from multiple aspects, it has been determined that only electronic signature documents that meet legal requirements can be used as judicial evidence. The contract lock has reviewed a large amount of court case materials from 2018 to the present, and through some“ The court does not recognize it; The case analysis has helped everyone organize common cases; Key points for avoiding pitfalls in electronic contracts; Note: The following precedents are sourced from ";

China Judgments Online

” Log in to the website and search for the corresponding case number to view the case details.

1. Unable to provide the original contract, the court does not recognize

○ (2019) Supreme Court Civil Final No. 950

The first instance court held that the key evidence submitted by Company A during the trial, the "Stock Option Agreement," was a copy and the original was not provided. Company A further explained that the agreement is an electronic signature, but did not provide any relevant materials to prove its claim. Therefore, the authenticity of the agreement is not recognized.

○ (2020) Chuan 01 Min Zhong 2834

The court determined in the second instance that the two online "loan contracts" submitted by Cao were both copies, and he did not prove the retrieval process of the contracts in the evidence exchange procedure. Therefore, the above evidence does not meet the requirements of the "Electronic Signature Law of the People's Republic of China" for the original form of data message evidence.

Contract lock solution: According to Article 15 of the "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Litigation", if the parties use electronic data as evidence, they shall provide the original documents.

Contract Lock

Electronic Signature The system can provide electronic file storage and encrypted transmission services for your signature. It has a complete evidence chain to restore the file retrieval process. In case of disputes, it can not only provide you with the original electronic file, but also help you prove the authenticity and integrity of the file. 2. It cannot be confirmed that it was signed with my true intention, and the court does not recognize

○ (2019) Gui Zhi Fu No. 72

There is no identification of the lender in this case, and the authenticity of the lender cannot be verified. The signing information at the end of the Loan Agreement (Version A) is only“ Geng, Deng, Zhang, and Lu; 、 “ Mr. Yu; Printing the words, there is no corresponding "Electronic Data Storage Certificate" that can prove the identity of the lender and borrower, and it cannot be confirmed that the signature sample in the "Loan Agreement (Version A)" is the signature signed by myself using a valid digital certificate issued by a CA institution. It is also impossible to confirm the authenticity of the electronic signature and whether it represents their true intention. After examination, it was found that the electronic contract signed between the plaintiff and defendant in this case was not authenticated by a national authority, and the defendant's electronic signature was not recognized by a national authority. As a result, the electronic contract was invalid, and the defendant's possession of the loan issued by the plaintiff had no legal basis or agreement. Therefore, the defendant should return the money to the plaintiff.

○ (2018) Su 01 Min Zhong 8119 In this case, the buying and selling website company did not provide evidence to prove that it had authenticated Zhang's identity information, phone number, or that Zhang had logged into its electronic signature platform and signed the contract. The effective (2017) Gan 11 Min Zhong No. 1540 civil judgment also found no evidence to prove that Zhang had registered on the electronic signature platform and did not confirm the authenticity of the electronic contract involved. Therefore, the buying and selling website company had a breach of contract in the authentication process of the electronic contract, resulting in B's losses, which should be compensated. ○ (2020) Liao 04 Zhi 458 This court cannot determine the“ in the Supplementary Agreement; Zhang's seal; The wording is a signature signed by the applicant using a valid number and certificate issued by a CA institution, and it cannot be confirmed the authenticity of the electronic signature or whether

represents its true meaning

.

○ (2023) Lu 10 Min Zhong 841

In the first instance, the electronic "Loan Agreement" provided by the parties in the PDF document did not show a reliable digital signature by Chu, who held his own digital certificate. Therefore, it cannot be determined that Chu had signed a loan contract with the bank, nor can it be determined that the defendant bank granted a loan to Chu. Contract lock solution: According to the requirements of the Electronic Signature Law, legal and valid electronic signatures must meet the“ Real identity; 、 “ True intention; 、 “ Content tamper proof; The requirement is that in the process of signing an electronic contract, the true identity and willingness information of the signatory must be verified to ensure the effectiveness of the signing. The contract lock electronic signature system is supported by authoritative digital certificates and integrates facial recognition and SMS verification code login technology to help authenticate and determine the true identity of the signatory during signing, ensuring that it is based on genuine intentions. At the same time, combined with data storage applications, it helps to restore the authentication and verification process, providing credible evidence for judicial judgments.

img src=" https://dl.qiyuesuo.com/image/23733fb4307d40d59428982090be8da4.

png" style="width: 300px; 3. The evidence chain is incomplete and the process cannot be restored. The court does not recognize the evidence provided by the appellant. ○○ (2020) Xiang 01 Min Zhong 2973

The evidence provided by the appellant only reflects the demonstration process of its backend system and cannot conclusively prove that Wang or his agent participated in the electronic signature or obtained the leased vehicle involved in the case, which cannot achieve its proof purpose. It did not provide sufficient evidence to prove that the electronic signature involved in the case is a reliable electronic signature.

Contract lock solution:

In this case, as the evidence provided by the parties cannot restore the entire signing process, it cannot be determined whether the related parties actually participated in the signing process as described. The contract lock electronic signature platform can provide users with full link data authentication services, which can fully record the signing party, identity authentication information, signed contracts, and document modification and editing processes. In case of disputes, it can be used as valid judicial evidence at any time to help restore the signing process, which is non repudiation, authentic and trustworthy. 4. It is uncertain whether the contract is complete and has not been tampered with, and the court does not recognize the defendant's signature on the plaintiff's electronic contract. The two parties have not formed a paper version of the contract, and the data message of the electronic contract is controlled and kept by the plaintiff. However, from the approval result notice, it can be seen that the collateral provided by the defendant to the bank is two sets of houses, which do not match the collateral stated in the commission contract. The plaintiff should provide evidence to prove the completeness and immutability of the contract, but the plaintiff is now unable to reproduce the above contract from the database backend. Therefore, the "House Mortgage Loan Commission Contract" submitted by the defendant is not accepted by the court. Contract lock solution: In this case, the parties are unable to reproduce the original contract, and there is a content deviation between the contract provided and the one provided by the defendant to the bank. It cannot be proven that the contract has not been tampered with after signing, so the court cannot confirm the authenticity of the contract. For the authenticity proof of contract content, the contract lock electronic signature system has CA digital certificate support to ensure that the file content can be identified and the contract content can be immediately invalidated once tampered with; At the same time, encrypted transmission is used to ensure that files cannot be modified during transmission and extraction, are tamper proof throughout the process, and have complete and trustworthy content.

5. The authenticity and uniqueness of the signature cannot be determined, and the court does not recognize it.

○ (2020) Xiang 11 Zhi 207

In this case, the party submitted a "Supplementary Agreement" with only one signature; Mao Mouyin; The electronic seal on which the font is ordinary printed font cannot be recognized as proprietary or exclusive, and should not be considered a reliable electronic signature. It cannot be confirmed that it was signed by Mao himself.

○ (2020) Yu 0112 Min Chu No. 11149

In this case, the plaintiff claimed that there was a legal relationship of loan between the plaintiff and the defendant, and it should be proved that there was a loan agreement between the two parties. However, the electronic contract seal in the printed copy of the loan agreement provided by the plaintiff cannot be verified whether it belongs to the defendant's company for possession and use, and the plaintiff has not provided any other evidence to prove the existence of a loan agreement between the two parties.

○ (2020) Shaan 09 Min Zhong 819

The appellant claims that the respondent applied for insurance electronically through the internet, and only provided the insurance application form, notification form, and facial recognition photos generated by their system. The respondent does not agree with this claim. Due to the significant difference between the signature of the respondent on the insurance application form and notification form and the signature of the respondent on the corresponding legal documents during the litigation process in this case, the respondent also does not recognize the authenticity of the signature on the insurance application form and notification form.

Contract lock solution:

The focus of disputes in such cases is simply the difference in signature handwriting, lacking evidence to prove that it is the same person's signature; In addition, the seal on the printed copy of the electronic contract is only a seal design, and it cannot be determined whether it is the seal held by the company.

The contract lock electronic signature binds the electronic seal and signature with the user's real identity through a trusted CA digital certificate, ensuring a unique correspondence, personal possession, and authenticity. And the signed electronic files support online authenticity verification. Click on the electronic seal and signature pattern to obtain the certification information and understand the authenticity of the seal and signature. 6. If the exemption clause is not clearly marked and indicated, the court will not recognize it. ○○○ (2020) Yuminshen No. 6661. From the specific process of electronic insurance, check the "Disclaimer Notice" on the left side of the title below the electronic insurance application page; I have read” The small box will take you to the next stage of insurance application, while reading the specific content of the disclaimer requires a separate click to open, and once opened, only“ Part One Liability Exemption Clause; 、 “ Third party liability insurance for motor vehicles; The title is displayed in bold and black, while the specific content of the exemption reasons related to driving escape, as stipulated in Article 24 of the exemption statement, is not displayed in bold and black. Based on the above situation, it remains to be further investigated whether the defendant property and casualty insurance company has provided sufficient prompts to draw the attention of the policyholder regarding the exemption matters involved in the case, and whether the compensation liability should be exempted. The original trial's determination that the defendant's insurance company is not liable for third-party liability insurance compensation is not based on sufficient evidence. Solution for Contract Lock: According to Article 10 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the General Principles of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China on Contract Compilation, which will be implemented on December 5, 2023, the party providing standard terms has the obligation to use clear markings such as text, symbols, fonts, etc. that are sufficient to attract the attention of the other party to indicate abnormal terms that have significant interests with the other party. The contract lock electronic signing platform supports“ Sign Notice Pop up Window; And“ Bold display of sensitive words; , can be centered around providing“ for the organization; Compliance with Contract Terms; Regulatory services. 1) Automatic recognition and bold display of sensitive words in contract text: For some sensitive words in contract text, such as“ Final interpretation, refund, compensation, etc; Users can directly add sensitive words that need to be detected according to their needs when configuring the signing process. When signing contracts later, the contract lock system will automatically identify the corresponding sensitive words and mark them in bold, without the need for manual browsing and to prevent unequal terms.

2) Support signing instructions prompt, contract key points pop-up reminder:

For the“ Rights and obligations, risk warnings, safety precautions, etc; Key terms can be prominently indicated through the contract lock signing notice pop-up window to prevent the signing party from missing or not reading the contract content carefully, ensuring the signing party's right to know.

(User defined signing instructions for the initiator - automatic pop-up reminder when the receiver reads) Remarks: The reference documents for the analysis of the above case rulings are as follows Article 10 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the General Principles of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China on Contract Compilation:

If the party providing the standard terms adopts obvious signs such as text, symbols, fonts, etc. that are usually sufficient to attract the attention of the other party at the time of contract formation, reminding the other party to pay attention to the exemption or reduction of its responsibilities, exclusion or restriction of its rights and other abnormal terms that have a significant interest relationship with the other party, the people's court may determine that it has fulfilled the obligation of prompting as stipulated in Article 496 (2) of the Civil Code. If the party providing standard terms, at the request of the other party, provides a written or oral explanation of the concept, content, and legal consequences of abnormal terms that have a significant interest relationship with the other party in a form that is generally understandable, the people's court may determine that it has fulfilled the obligation of explanation stipulated in Article 496 (2) of the Civil Code. The party providing the standard terms bears the burden of proof that they have fulfilled their obligation to indicate or explain. For an electronic contract concluded through the Internet and other information networks, if the party providing the standard terms only claims that it has performed the obligation of prompt or explanation on the grounds of setting check boxes, pop-up windows, etc., the people's court will not support it, except that its evidence is in line with the provisions of the preceding two paragraphs. Article 4 to Article 8 of the Electronic Signature Law. Article 4: A data message that can tangibly represent the content contained and can be accessed and used at any time shall be deemed to be in written form that meets the requirements of laws and regulations.

Article 5: Data messages that meet the following conditions shall be deemed to meet the original form requirements stipulated by laws and regulations: (1) they can effectively express the content contained and be available for retrieval and use at any time; (2) It can reliably ensure that the content remains complete and unchanged from the time of its final formation. However, adding endorsements to data messages and any formal changes that occur during data exchange, storage, and display do not affect the integrity of data messages. Article 6: Data telegrams that meet the following conditions shall be deemed to meet the file preservation requirements stipulated by laws and regulations:; (2) The format of a data message is the same as the format in which it was generated, sent, or received, or the format is different but can accurately represent the original content generated, sent, or received; (3) Able to identify the sender, recipient, and time of sending and receiving of data messages. Article 7: Data messages shall not be refused as evidence solely because they were generated, sent, received, or stored by electronic, optical, magnetic, or similar means.

Article 8: When examining the authenticity of data messages as evidence, the following factors should be considered:

(1) the reliability of the methods used to generate, store, or transmit data messages;

; (2) The reliability of methods for maintaining content integrity; (3) The reliability of the method used to identify the sender; (4) Other related factors.

Article 469 of the Civil Code

The parties may enter into a contract in writing, orally, or in any other form.

. Written form refers to the tangible representation of the contents contained in contracts, letters, telegrams, telegrams, faxes, and other forms. A data message that can tangibly express its contents through electronic data interchange, email, or other means, and can be accessed and used at any time, is considered in written form.

Article 93 and Article 94 of the "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Litigation" (2019 Amendment)

Article 93: People's courts shall comprehensively judge the authenticity of electronic data based on the following factors: (1) whether the hardware and software environment of the computer system relied upon for the generation, storage, and transmission of electronic data is complete and reliable; （2） Whether the hardware and software environment of the computer system relied upon for the generation, storage, and transmission of electronic data is in a normal operating state, or whether it has an impact on the generation, storage, and transmission of electronic data when it is not in a normal operating state; （3） Whether the hardware and software environment of the computer system relied upon for the generation, storage, and transmission of electronic data has effective monitoring and verification methods to prevent errors; （4） Whether electronic data is fully stored, transmitted, and extracted, and whether the methods of storage, transmission, and extraction are reliable; （5） Whether electronic data is formed and stored in normal exchange activities; （6） Is the subject responsible for storing, transmitting, and extracting electronic data appropriate; （7） Other factors that affect the integrity and reliability of electronic data. If the people's court deems it necessary, it may examine and judge the authenticity of electronic data through methods such as appraisal or investigation. Article 94: If electronic data exists in the following circumstances, the people's court may confirm its authenticity, except for evidence to the contrary that is sufficient to refute it: (1) electronic data submitted or kept by the parties that is unfavorable to themselves; （2） Provided or confirmed by a neutral third-party platform that records and stores electronic data; （3） Formed in normal business activities; （4） Preserved through archive management methods; （5） Preserved, transmitted, and extracted in the manner agreed upon by the parties. If the content of electronic data has been notarized by a notary public, the people's court shall confirm its authenticity, except where there is evidence to the contrary that is sufficient to refute it.

Summary

Currently, electronic contracts=“ https://www.qiyuesuo.com/?source=12&keyword=gw -Sfpl231214 "rel=" noopener noreferer "target=" -blank ">Electronic signatures have been widely used in various aspects of office work. In recent years, with the joint promotion of various levels of government agencies, electronic signatures and contracts have established a sound and mature legal foundation.

Contract LockElectronic SignatureSystemDesigned and developed in strict compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, it can provide users with real identity authentication, real intention verification, and legal validity around the signing processElectronic signature, data storage, and electronic signature verification services ensure compliance throughout contract signing, transmission, and storage. In case of disputes, real-time full link data storage reports and online certification services can be provided to ensure worry free throughout the entire process.
Click to enter and try it for free now!