header-logo header-logo

Are e-signatures secure?

22 September 2021
Issue: 7949 / Categories: Legal News , Technology , Profession
printer mail-detail
Ministers have launched an expert industry working group to boost public confidence in e-signatures

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) set up the group following a recommendation from the Law Commission. It will be chaired by Mr Justice Fraser, under the oversight of Lord Justice Birss, and assisted by Professor Sarah Green of the Law Commission alongside legal and industry experts. Its remit is to improve standards, reliability and security in e-signatures and other digital means of legally executing documents, and to look into best practice in this area.

It will analyse the use of different technologies for e-signatures, look at safeguards for video-witnessing of deeds, best practice guidance for e-signatures particularly where vulnerable adults execute documents electronically, consider the challenges involved in cross-border transactions and how best to protect signatories from fraud.

The group began meeting this summer and aims to produce an interim report by the end of 2021 setting out initial thoughts and recommendations for reform to the government.

In 2019, the Law Commission reported that while e-signatures are legally valid for most purposes, there is a lack of clarity and confidence around their use.

Meanwhile, MPs have launched a short inquiry into open justice and court reporting in the digital age.

The Justice Committee will look at how the media’s coverage of the courts has changed, focusing on the impact of technology and court reform and investigating potential barriers to ensuring proceedings remain transparent and accessible. It will consider opportunities for using digital technology to enhance open justice and the impact of social media on court reporting.

It is inviting written evidence, to be submitted by 18 October 2021, on how media coverage has changed, barriers to the media obtaining information, the impact of social media and the effect of court reform and remote hearings on open justice. Find out more here.

Issue: 7949 / Categories: Legal News , Technology , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

WSP Solicitors—Amie Williamson

WSP Solicitors—Amie Williamson

Gloucestershire firm boosts residential conveyancing team

mfg Solicitors—Andrew Johnson

mfg Solicitors—Andrew Johnson

Firm strengthens corporate team in Worcester with new hire

London Market FOIL—Ling Ong

London Market FOIL—Ling Ong

Weightmans partner appointed president of London Market Forum of Insurance Lawyers

NEWS
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
The long-awaited Getty Images v Stability AI judgment arrived at the end of last year—but not with the seismic impact many expected. In this week's issue of NLJ, experts from Arnold & Porter dissect a ruling that is ‘historic’ yet tightly confined
The UK Supreme Court may be deciding fewer cases, but its impact in 2025 was anything but muted. In this week's NLJ, Professor Emeritus Brice Dickson of Queen’s University Belfast reviews a year marked by historically low output, a striking rise in jointly authored judgments, and a continued decline in dissent. High-profile rulings on biological sex under the Equality Act, public access to Dartmoor, and fairness in sexual offence trials ensured the court’s voice carried far beyond the Strand
back-to-top-scroll