What makes an electronic signature valid? Evidence, not labels
Vendors sell tiers. Courts ask questions. This is what the law actually requires in New Zealand, Australia, the UK and Ireland — and what you need to be able to show.
Two families of law, not one
There is no single global framework for electronic signatures, and no regional grouping gives you one either. What exists are two broad approaches.
Open, technology-neutral regimes. New Zealand and Australia belong here. There are no signature tiers at all. The law asks that the signature adequately identify the signatory, indicate their approval, and be as reliable as is appropriate for the purpose and the circumstances. Nothing prescribes how you achieve that.
Tiered regimes. The EU, and the UK through its retained version of eIDAS, define three levels: simple, advanced and qualified. Only the qualified level carries an automatic presumption of reliability. The simple level remains expressly admissible — the tiers change what you must demonstrate, not whether the signature counts.
| Country | Framework | What the law asks |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand OPEN |
Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 Checked August 2026 |
Adequate identification, indication of approval, and reliability appropriate to the purpose. No tiers. |
| Australia OPEN |
Electronic Transactions Act 1999 (Cth) and state equivalents Checked August 2026 |
Consent to transact electronically, plus a method as reliable as appropriate in the circumstances. Exemptions listed in the Electronic Transactions Regulations 2020. |
| United Kingdom TIERED |
UK eIDAS Regulation, retained after Brexit; Electronic Communications Act 2000 Checked August 2026 |
Three tiers as in the EU. Admissibility of the simple tier under section 7 of the 2000 Act. |
| Ireland TIERED |
eIDAS as an EU member state; Electronic Commerce Act 2000 Checked August 2026 |
Three tiers, identical to the rest of the EU. |
We publish only what we have checked, with the source and the date. If your country is not listed, we make no claim about it — ask us and we will look before you commit. Some countries recognise only signatures produced through locally licensed certification authorities, which would exclude us there.
What a court actually asks
Whichever family applies, a disputed signature comes down to three questions. Practitioners often label them intent, identity and integrity.
- Intent. Did the person understand they were entering a binding agreement? A statement they accepted, and the interval between opening the document and signing it, speak to this.
- Identity. Is the person who signed the named party? This is where most disputes are won or lost, and where the honest answer matters more than a label.
- Integrity. Has the document changed since signing? This one is purely technical, and it is the one most providers describe but few let you verify.
Notice that the tier label answers none of these directly. It shifts how much you must demonstrate. At the qualified level the law presumes reliability; everywhere else you demonstrate it — with evidence.
What we provide against each
Every envelope comes with an evidence file, in a readable PDF and in structured JSON, published in both French and English inside the same sealed document.
- Intent. The statement each signatory expressly accepted, recorded verbatim. The signature drawn by hand rather than picked from a font list. Timestamps for both the document viewing and the signature, so the interval between them is on record.
- Identity. A personal named link with 256 bits of entropy, of which only the SHA-256 digest is stored. A six-digit one-time code, valid ten minutes, limited to five attempts, sent either to the signatory's email or — on a distinct channel — to their mobile. The IP address and browser at signing. And the town, if the signatory declares one.
- Integrity. Published SHA-256 digests of both the original document as
presented to the signatories and the sealed version, a PAdES organisation seal, and an
RFC 3161 timestamp. You can verify the digests yourself with
shasum, and the evidence file itself is signed so you can confirm we have not rewritten it.
Where we are candid. The identity of each signatory is declared by the sender and not verified against an identity document. That is stated plainly in the evidence file itself, not buried in terms. It is also why we do not claim the advanced tier of article 26: that requires documentary identity verification and a signature certificate under the signatory's sole control, neither of which we do. A file that names its own limits holds up better than one that hides them and gets them pointed out in a hearing.
Documents that stay on paper
One category matters more than any tier discussion, and it is remarkably consistent across countries: some documents sit outside electronic signature regimes entirely.
- Wills, affidavits and statutory declarations
- Anything requiring a witness — in the UK, that includes deeds
- Notarial acts
- Many land transfer instruments. HM Land Registry does not generally accept electronically signed documents for registrable transactions, and in Ireland unregistered title remains outside the Electronic Commerce Act.
No provider, at any tier, changes this. Check the document type before the signature method.
Questions
Is a simple electronic signature legally valid?
Yes, in every jurisdiction we have checked. New Zealand and Australia use open, technology-neutral models with no signature tiers at all: what matters is that the signature adequately identifies the signatory, indicates their approval, and is as reliable as appropriate for the purpose. The UK and Ireland use the eIDAS tiers, where the simple level is expressly admissible. In none of them does validity depend on buying a higher tier.
What does a court actually ask when a signature is disputed?
Three questions, in practice. Did the person intend to be bound? Is the person who signed the named party? And has the document changed since it was signed? Practitioners often call these intent, identity and integrity. The tier label answers none of them directly: it only shifts how much you have to demonstrate, which is why the evidence file does the real work.
Which documents cannot be signed electronically?
The categories are remarkably consistent across countries: wills, affidavits and statutory declarations, documents requiring a witness, notarial acts, and many land transfer instruments. In the UK, deeds require a witness and HM Land Registry does not generally accept electronically signed documents for registrable transactions. In Ireland, unregistered title remains outside the scope of the Electronic Commerce Act.
Do you provide advanced or qualified electronic signatures?
No, and we prefer to say so plainly. Both require verifying the signatory against an identity document and issuing them a signature certificate under their sole control. We do neither. Where an advanced or qualified signature is required, use a provider on the EU trusted list.