Admissibility of Electronic Awards in the UNCITRAL Model Law Jurisdiction: Polish Law Example

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW
B. Kalisz
{"title":"Admissibility of Electronic Awards in the UNCITRAL Model Law Jurisdiction: Polish Law Example","authors":"B. Kalisz","doi":"10.54648/joia2021009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author examines whether an award signed electronically can be deemed to constitute an award in writing as provided for in Article 31 of the UNCITRAL Model Law, which is reflected verbatim in article 1197 of the Polish Civil Code. The conclusion is that an electronic signature as such is functionally equivalent to the written signature. Having said that, not all types of electronic signature can be admitted in this respect. The eIDAS Regulation (Regulation 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on electronic identification and trust services) provides for three types of electronic signature: regular, advanced, and qualified, stating that the qualified signature should be deemed as equivalent to the written signature. The author is of the opinion that both the advanced and qualified electronic signatures fulfil the requirements of the form ‘in writing’, ensuring the safeguards as listed in article 26 of the Regulation. Specifically: it is uniquely linked to the signatory; it is capable of identifying the signatory; it is created using electronic signature creation data that the signatory can, with a high level of confidence, use under his sole control; and it is linked to the data signed therewith in such a way that any subsequent change in the data is detectable.\narbitration, form of acts in law, arbitration award, electronic form, UNCITRAL model law, electronic signature, eIDAS Regulation","PeriodicalId":43527,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Arbitration","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Arbitration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/joia2021009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The author examines whether an award signed electronically can be deemed to constitute an award in writing as provided for in Article 31 of the UNCITRAL Model Law, which is reflected verbatim in article 1197 of the Polish Civil Code. The conclusion is that an electronic signature as such is functionally equivalent to the written signature. Having said that, not all types of electronic signature can be admitted in this respect. The eIDAS Regulation (Regulation 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on electronic identification and trust services) provides for three types of electronic signature: regular, advanced, and qualified, stating that the qualified signature should be deemed as equivalent to the written signature. The author is of the opinion that both the advanced and qualified electronic signatures fulfil the requirements of the form ‘in writing’, ensuring the safeguards as listed in article 26 of the Regulation. Specifically: it is uniquely linked to the signatory; it is capable of identifying the signatory; it is created using electronic signature creation data that the signatory can, with a high level of confidence, use under his sole control; and it is linked to the data signed therewith in such a way that any subsequent change in the data is detectable. arbitration, form of acts in law, arbitration award, electronic form, UNCITRAL model law, electronic signature, eIDAS Regulation
电子裁决在贸易法委员会示范法管辖范围内的可受理性:波兰法范例
作者研究了电子签署的裁决书是否可以被视为《贸易法委员会示范法》第31条所规定的书面裁决书,波兰民法典第1197条逐字反映了这一点。结论是,这样的电子签名在功能上等同于书面签名。话虽如此,并非所有类型的电子签名都可以在这方面被承认。eIDAS法规(欧洲议会和理事会关于电子识别和信托服务的第910/2014号法规)规定了三种类型的电子签名:常规、高级和合格,并指出合格签名应被视为等同于书面签名。作者认为,先进的和合格的电子签名都符合“书面”形式的要求,确保了条例第26条所列的保障措施。具体来说:它与签署国有唯一的联系;能够识别签字人;它是使用电子签名创建数据创建的,签署人可以高度自信地在他的唯一控制下使用;并以下述方式将其与在其上签名的数据相连接,使得该数据的任何后续变化都是可检测的。仲裁,法律行为形式,仲裁裁决,电子形式,UNCITRAL示范法,电子签名,eIDAS规则
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
50.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Since its 1984 launch, the Journal of International Arbitration has established itself as a thought provoking, ground breaking journal aimed at the specific requirements of those involved in international arbitration. Each issue contains in depth investigations of the most important current issues in international arbitration, focusing on business, investment, and economic disputes between private corporations, State controlled entities, and States. The new Notes and Current Developments sections contain concise and critical commentary on new developments. The journal’s worldwide coverage and bimonthly circulation give it even more immediacy as a forum for original thinking, penetrating analysis and lively discussion of international arbitration issues from around the globe.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信