header-logo header-logo

The mighty pen?

16 January 2026 / Athelstane Aamodt
Issue: 8145 / Categories: Features , Contract , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail
240095
Athelstane Aamodt asks: when is a signature not a signature?

As readers may be aware, President Joe Biden’s portrait in the White House has been replaced with an image of an ‘autopen’ signing his name. The device, which is mechanical in nature, replicates the original signature of a living person. It has been in existence for some time (Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) bought a more rudimentary form of the device), and a large number of presidents have used it, starting with President Harry Truman.

The use of the device does raise some interesting questions for lawyers. If the signature is not ‘genuine’ in the traditional sense that people tend to understand it (ie, the relevant person has signed the document in the room with his or her own hand), then why does one require a signature at all? In an age of e-signatures on PDFs, which, again, are not anything like traditional ‘wet ink’ signatures, are traditional signatures really necessary these days?

Limited use

The use of the autopen has been largely uncontroversial,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

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