The Act makes electronic communications functionally equivalent to paper for many State-law requirements (writing, signatures, notices, production and record-keeping) so long as the electronic method meets factual tests (accessibility, integrity) and the parties consent or agree. It affects businesses, government and individuals who rely on electronic processes.
It also sets default rules for when and where electronic messages are sent/received and when they bind an originator, shifts compliance costs to senders/keepers to prove technical reliability, and preserves other laws that require specific technologies.
This instrument sets a statutory baseline for treating electronic communications as satisfying a wide range of formal and procedural requirements under State laws. It does two things mechanically. First, it declares that a transaction or required act is not invalid merely because it was conducted wholly or partly by electronic communications (s 8). Second, it converts many discrete formal requirements that previously demanded paper, signatures, particular storage media, or in-person action into tests that can be satisfied by electronic equivalents if specified conditions are met (Parts 2 and 3, notably ss 11-21). The statutory tests are expressed repeatedly as conjunctive reasonableness, consent and integrity or accessibility thresholds. For example, a writing requirement is satisfied where the information is given electronically provided that it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible for subsequent reference and the recipient consents (s 11). A signature requirement is satisfied where a method identifies the person and indicates their intention and is either as reliable as appropriate to the purpose or proven in fact to have fulfilled those functions, and the recipient consents (s 14). Production and retention requirements are satisfied where electronic forms maintain the integrity of the information and are reasonably accessible, and where consent or any regulation-specified storage medium is complied with (ss 16, 17, 19-21).
The instrument also sets default rules for timing and place for dispatch and receipt of electronic communications (ss 23-25), attribution of messages (s 26), and a set of additional rules that apply to contracts formed or performed under the State law (ss 26A-26E). The contract provisions treat widely accessible electronic proposals as invitations to treat unless the proposer clearly intends to be bound (s 26B), protect contracts formed by automated message systems from invalidation solely because no human intervened (s 26C), and give a limited right to withdraw an erroneous input where an automated system did not allow correction and no material benefit was taken (s 26D). Where other State laws require particular technology, devices, signatures, unique identifiers or methods, the statutory baseline does not override them (ss 13, 15, 18).
Current sections
Direct links to the current provisions in Electronic Transactions (Queensland) Act 2001.
35
ch.2-pt.1
General rule about validity of transactions for State laws
General rule about validity of transactions for State laws
sec.8
Validity of electronic transactions
sec.8 Validity of electronic transactions
A transaction is not invalid under a State law merely because it took place wholly or partly by 1 or more electronic communications.
However, the general rule in subsection (1) does not apply for the validity of a transaction to the extent to which another, more specific, provision of this chapter deals with its validity.
(sec.8-ssec.1) A transaction is not invalid under a State law merely because it took place wholly or partly by 1 or more electronic communications.
(sec.8-ssec.2) However, the general rule in subsection (1) does not apply for the validity of a transaction to the extent to which another, more specific, provision of this chapter deals with its validity.
ch.2-pt.2
Requirements under State laws
Requirements under State laws
ch.2-pt.2-div.1
Writing
Writing
sec.9
Application
sec.9 Application
This division applies to a requirement or permission to give information, whether the expression give, send or serve, or another expression, is used.
sec.10
Definitions for div 1
sec.10 Definitions for div 1
In this division—
give information includes, but is not limited to, the following—
make an application;
make or lodge a claim;
give, send or serve a notification;
lodge a return;
make a request;
make a declaration;
lodge or issue a certificate;
make, vary or cancel an election;
lodge an objection;
give a statement of reasons.
(a) make an application;
(b) make or lodge a claim;
(c) give, send or serve a notification;
(d) lodge a return;
(e) make a request;
(f) make a declaration;
(g) lodge or issue a certificate;
(h) make, vary or cancel an election;
(i) lodge an objection;
(j) give a statement of reasons.
sec.11
Requirement to give information in writing
sec.11 Requirement to give information in writing
If, under a State law, a person is required to give information in writing, the requirement is taken to have been met if the person gives the information by an electronic communication in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
The circumstances are that—
at the time the information was given, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
the person to whom the information is required to be given consents to the information being given by an electronic communication.
(sec.11-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person is required to give information in writing, the requirement is taken to have been met if the person gives the information by an electronic communication in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
(sec.11-ssec.2) The circumstances are that— at the time the information was given, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and the person to whom the information is required to be given consents to the information being given by an electronic communication.
(a) at the time the information was given, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
(b) the person to whom the information is required to be given consents to the information being given by an electronic communication.
sec.12
Permission to give information in writing
sec.12 Permission to give information in writing
If, under a State law, a person is permitted to give information in writing, the person may give the information by an electronic communication in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
The circumstances are that—
at the time the information was given, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
the person to whom the information is permitted to be given consents to the information being given by an electronic communication.
(sec.12-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person is permitted to give information in writing, the person may give the information by an electronic communication in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
(sec.12-ssec.2) The circumstances are that— at the time the information was given, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and the person to whom the information is permitted to be given consents to the information being given by an electronic communication.
(a) at the time the information was given, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
(b) the person to whom the information is permitted to be given consents to the information being given by an electronic communication.
sec.13
Other particular laws not affected
sec.13 Other particular laws not affected
Sections 11 and 12 do not affect the operation of another State law that makes provision about requiring or permitting information to be given, in accordance with particular information technology requirements—
on a particular kind of data storage device; or
by a particular kind of electronic communication.
(a) on a particular kind of data storage device; or
(b) by a particular kind of electronic communication.
ch.2-pt.2-div.2
Signatures
Signatures
sec.14
Requirement for signature
sec.14 Requirement for signature
If, under a State law, a person’s signature is required, the requirement is taken to have been met for an electronic communication if—
a method is used to identify the person and to indicate the person’s intention in relation to the information communicated; and
the method used was either—
as reliable as appropriate for the purposes for which the electronic communication was generated or communicated, having regard to all the circumstances, including any relevant agreement; or
proven in fact to have fulfilled the functions described in paragraph (a) , by itself or together with further evidence; and
the person to whom the signature is required to be given consents to the requirement being met by using the method mentioned in paragraph (a) .
The reference in subsection (1) to a law that requires a signature includes a reference to a law that provides consequences for the absence of a signature.
s 14 amd 2013 No. 35 s 72
(sec.14-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person’s signature is required, the requirement is taken to have been met for an electronic communication if— a method is used to identify the person and to indicate the person’s intention in relation to the information communicated; and the method used was either— as reliable as appropriate for the purposes for which the electronic communication was generated or communicated, having regard to all the circumstances, including any relevant agreement; or proven in fact to have fulfilled the functions described in paragraph (a) , by itself or together with further evidence; and the person to whom the signature is required to be given consents to the requirement being met by using the method mentioned in paragraph (a) .
(sec.14-ssec.2) The reference in subsection (1) to a law that requires a signature includes a reference to a law that provides consequences for the absence of a signature.
(a) a method is used to identify the person and to indicate the person’s intention in relation to the information communicated; and
(b) the method used was either— (i) as reliable as appropriate for the purposes for which the electronic communication was generated or communicated, having regard to all the circumstances, including any relevant agreement; or (ii) proven in fact to have fulfilled the functions described in paragraph (a) , by itself or together with further evidence; and
(i) as reliable as appropriate for the purposes for which the electronic communication was generated or communicated, having regard to all the circumstances, including any relevant agreement; or
(ii) proven in fact to have fulfilled the functions described in paragraph (a) , by itself or together with further evidence; and
(c) the person to whom the signature is required to be given consents to the requirement being met by using the method mentioned in paragraph (a) .
(i) as reliable as appropriate for the purposes for which the electronic communication was generated or communicated, having regard to all the circumstances, including any relevant agreement; or
(ii) proven in fact to have fulfilled the functions described in paragraph (a) , by itself or together with further evidence; and
sec.15
Other particular laws not affected
sec.15 Other particular laws not affected
Section 14 does not affect the operation of another State law that makes provision for or in relation to requiring—
an electronic communication to contain an electronic signature, however described; or
an electronic communication to contain a unique identification in an electronic form; or
a particular method to be used for an electronic communication to identify the originator of the communication and to indicate the originator’s intention in relation to the information communicated.
s 15 amd 2013 No. 35 s 73
(a) an electronic communication to contain an electronic signature, however described; or
(b) an electronic communication to contain a unique identification in an electronic form; or
(c) a particular method to be used for an electronic communication to identify the originator of the communication and to indicate the originator’s intention in relation to the information communicated.
ch.2-pt.2-div.3
Production of document
Production of document
sec.16
Requirement to produce document
sec.16 Requirement to produce document
If, under a State law, a person is required to produce a document that is in the form of paper, an article or other material, the requirement is taken to have been met if the person produces, by an electronic communication, an electronic form of the document in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
The circumstances are that—
having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the communication was sent, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and
when the communication was sent, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
the person to whom the document is required to be produced consents to the production, by an electronic communication, of an electronic form of the document.
For subsection (2) (a) , the integrity of information contained in a document is maintained only if the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from—
the addition of any endorsement; or
any immaterial change;
arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display.
s 16 amd 2002 No. 34 s 17 ; 2010 No. 42 s 214 sch
(sec.16-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person is required to produce a document that is in the form of paper, an article or other material, the requirement is taken to have been met if the person produces, by an electronic communication, an electronic form of the document in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
(sec.16-ssec.2) The circumstances are that— having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the communication was sent, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and when the communication was sent, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and the person to whom the document is required to be produced consents to the production, by an electronic communication, of an electronic form of the document.
(sec.16-ssec.3) For subsection (2) (a) , the integrity of information contained in a document is maintained only if the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from— the addition of any endorsement; or any immaterial change; arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display.
(a) having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the communication was sent, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and
(b) when the communication was sent, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
(c) the person to whom the document is required to be produced consents to the production, by an electronic communication, of an electronic form of the document.
(a) the addition of any endorsement; or
(b) any immaterial change;
sec.17
Permission to produce a document
sec.17 Permission to produce a document
If, under a State law, a person is permitted to produce a document in the form of paper, an article or other material, then, instead of producing the document in that form, the person may produce, by an electronic communication, an electronic form of the document in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
The circumstances are that—
having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the communication was sent, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and
when the communication was sent, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
the person to whom the document is permitted to be produced consents to the production, by an electronic communication, of an electronic form of the document.
For subsection (2) (a) , the integrity of information contained in a document is maintained only if the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from—
the addition of any endorsement; or
any immaterial change;
arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display.
(sec.17-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person is permitted to produce a document in the form of paper, an article or other material, then, instead of producing the document in that form, the person may produce, by an electronic communication, an electronic form of the document in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
(sec.17-ssec.2) The circumstances are that— having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the communication was sent, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and when the communication was sent, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and the person to whom the document is permitted to be produced consents to the production, by an electronic communication, of an electronic form of the document.
(sec.17-ssec.3) For subsection (2) (a) , the integrity of information contained in a document is maintained only if the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from— the addition of any endorsement; or any immaterial change; arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display.
(a) having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the communication was sent, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and
(b) when the communication was sent, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
(c) the person to whom the document is permitted to be produced consents to the production, by an electronic communication, of an electronic form of the document.
(a) the addition of any endorsement; or
(b) any immaterial change;
sec.18
Other particular laws not affected
sec.18 Other particular laws not affected
Sections 16 and 17 do not affect the operation of another State law that makes provision for or in relation to requiring or permitting electronic forms of documents to be produced, in accordance with particular information technology requirements—
on a particular kind of data storage device; or
by a particular kind of electronic communication.
(a) on a particular kind of data storage device; or
(b) by a particular kind of electronic communication.
ch.2-pt.2-div.4
Recording and keeping information and documents
Recording and keeping information and documents
sec.19
Recording information
sec.19 Recording information
If, under a State law, a person is required to record information in writing, the requirement is taken to have been met if the person records the information in electronic form in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
The circumstances are that—
at the time the information was recorded, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
if a regulation requires the information to be recorded on a particular kind of data storage device, the requirement has been met.
(sec.19-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person is required to record information in writing, the requirement is taken to have been met if the person records the information in electronic form in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
(sec.19-ssec.2) The circumstances are that— at the time the information was recorded, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and if a regulation requires the information to be recorded on a particular kind of data storage device, the requirement has been met.
(a) at the time the information was recorded, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
(b) if a regulation requires the information to be recorded on a particular kind of data storage device, the requirement has been met.
sec.20
Keeping written documents
sec.20 Keeping written documents
If, under a State law, a person is required to keep, for a particular period, a document that is in the form of paper, an article or other material, the requirement is taken to have been met if the person keeps, or causes another person to keep, an electronic form of the document for the period in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
The circumstances are that—
having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the electronic form of the document was generated, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and
when the electronic form of the document was generated, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
if a regulation requires the electronic form of the document to be kept on a particular kind of data storage device, the requirement has been met for the period.
For subsection (2) (a) , the integrity of information contained in a document is maintained only if the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from—
the addition of any endorsement; or
any immaterial change;
arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display.
(sec.20-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person is required to keep, for a particular period, a document that is in the form of paper, an article or other material, the requirement is taken to have been met if the person keeps, or causes another person to keep, an electronic form of the document for the period in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
(sec.20-ssec.2) The circumstances are that— having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the electronic form of the document was generated, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and when the electronic form of the document was generated, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and if a regulation requires the electronic form of the document to be kept on a particular kind of data storage device, the requirement has been met for the period.
(sec.20-ssec.3) For subsection (2) (a) , the integrity of information contained in a document is maintained only if the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from— the addition of any endorsement; or any immaterial change; arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display.
(a) having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the electronic form of the document was generated, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and
(b) when the electronic form of the document was generated, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
(c) if a regulation requires the electronic form of the document to be kept on a particular kind of data storage device, the requirement has been met for the period.
(a) the addition of any endorsement; or
(b) any immaterial change;
sec.21
Keeping electronic communications
sec.21 Keeping electronic communications
If, under a State law, a person ( keeper ) is required to keep, for a particular period, information that was the subject of an electronic communication, the requirement is taken to have been met if the keeper keeps, or causes another person to keep, in electronic form, the information for the period in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
The circumstances are that—
at the commencement of the keeping of the information, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
having regard to all the relevant circumstances at the commencement of the keeping of the information, the method of keeping the information in electronic form provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the electronic communication; and
during the period, the keeper also keeps, or causes the other person to keep, in electronic form, such additional information obtained by the keeper as is enough to enable the identification of the following—
the origin of the electronic communication;
the destination of the electronic communication;
when the electronic communication was sent;
when the electronic communication was received; and
at the commencement of the keeping of the additional information mentioned in paragraph (c) , it was reasonable to expect the additional information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
if a regulation requires the information to be kept on a particular kind of data storage device—the requirement has been met for the period.
For subsection (2) (b) , the integrity of information that was the subject of an electronic communication is maintained only if the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from—
the addition of any endorsement; or
any immaterial change;
arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display.
(sec.21-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person ( keeper ) is required to keep, for a particular period, information that was the subject of an electronic communication, the requirement is taken to have been met if the keeper keeps, or causes another person to keep, in electronic form, the information for the period in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
(sec.21-ssec.2) The circumstances are that— at the commencement of the keeping of the information, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and having regard to all the relevant circumstances at the commencement of the keeping of the information, the method of keeping the information in electronic form provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the electronic communication; and during the period, the keeper also keeps, or causes the other person to keep, in electronic form, such additional information obtained by the keeper as is enough to enable the identification of the following— the origin of the electronic communication; the destination of the electronic communication; when the electronic communication was sent; when the electronic communication was received; and at the commencement of the keeping of the additional information mentioned in paragraph (c) , it was reasonable to expect the additional information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and if a regulation requires the information to be kept on a particular kind of data storage device—the requirement has been met for the period.
(sec.21-ssec.3) For subsection (2) (b) , the integrity of information that was the subject of an electronic communication is maintained only if the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from— the addition of any endorsement; or any immaterial change; arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display.
(a) at the commencement of the keeping of the information, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
(b) having regard to all the relevant circumstances at the commencement of the keeping of the information, the method of keeping the information in electronic form provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the electronic communication; and
(c) during the period, the keeper also keeps, or causes the other person to keep, in electronic form, such additional information obtained by the keeper as is enough to enable the identification of the following— (i) the origin of the electronic communication; (ii) the destination of the electronic communication; (iii) when the electronic communication was sent; (iv) when the electronic communication was received; and
(i) the origin of the electronic communication;
(ii) the destination of the electronic communication;
(iii) when the electronic communication was sent;
(iv) when the electronic communication was received; and
(d) at the commencement of the keeping of the additional information mentioned in paragraph (c) , it was reasonable to expect the additional information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
(e) if a regulation requires the information to be kept on a particular kind of data storage device—the requirement has been met for the period.
(i) the origin of the electronic communication;
(ii) the destination of the electronic communication;
(iii) when the electronic communication was sent;
(iv) when the electronic communication was received; and
(a) the addition of any endorsement; or
(b) any immaterial change;
ch.2-pt.3
Other provisions about State laws
Other provisions about State laws
ch.2-pt.3-div.1
Application
Application
sec.22
Application of part 3
sec.22 Application of part 3
This part applies for each State law.
ch.2-pt.3-div.2
Time of dispatch and receipt
Time of dispatch and receipt
sec.23
Time of dispatch
sec.23 Time of dispatch
Unless otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee of an electronic communication, the time of dispatch of the electronic communication is—
the time when the electronic communication leaves an information system under the control of the originator or of the party who sent it on behalf of the originator; or
if the electronic communication has not left an information system under the control of the originator or of the party who sent it on behalf of the originator—the time the electronic communication is received by the addressee.
Subsection (1) applies even though the place the information system supporting an electronic address is located may be different from the place the electronic communication is taken to have been dispatched under section 25 .
s 23 sub 2013 No. 35 s 74
(sec.23-ssec.1) Unless otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee of an electronic communication, the time of dispatch of the electronic communication is— the time when the electronic communication leaves an information system under the control of the originator or of the party who sent it on behalf of the originator; or if the electronic communication has not left an information system under the control of the originator or of the party who sent it on behalf of the originator—the time the electronic communication is received by the addressee.
(sec.23-ssec.2) Subsection (1) applies even though the place the information system supporting an electronic address is located may be different from the place the electronic communication is taken to have been dispatched under section 25 .
(a) the time when the electronic communication leaves an information system under the control of the originator or of the party who sent it on behalf of the originator; or
(b) if the electronic communication has not left an information system under the control of the originator or of the party who sent it on behalf of the originator—the time the electronic communication is received by the addressee.
sec.24
Time of receipt
sec.24 Time of receipt
Unless otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee of an electronic communication—
the time of receipt of the electronic communication is the time the electronic communication becomes capable of being retrieved by the addressee at an electronic address designated by the addressee; or
the time of receipt of the electronic communication at another electronic address of the addressee is the time when both—
the electronic communication has become capable of being retrieved by the addressee at that address; and
the addressee has become aware that the electronic communication has been sent to that address.
For subsection (1) , unless otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee of the electronic communication, it is to be assumed that the electronic communication is capable of being retrieved by the addressee when it reaches the addressee’s electronic address.
Subsection (1) applies even though the place the information system supporting an electronic address is located may be different from the place the electronic communication is taken to have been received under section 25 .
s 24 sub 2013 No. 35 s 74
(sec.24-ssec.1) Unless otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee of an electronic communication— the time of receipt of the electronic communication is the time the electronic communication becomes capable of being retrieved by the addressee at an electronic address designated by the addressee; or the time of receipt of the electronic communication at another electronic address of the addressee is the time when both— the electronic communication has become capable of being retrieved by the addressee at that address; and the addressee has become aware that the electronic communication has been sent to that address.
(sec.24-ssec.2) For subsection (1) , unless otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee of the electronic communication, it is to be assumed that the electronic communication is capable of being retrieved by the addressee when it reaches the addressee’s electronic address.
(sec.24-ssec.3) Subsection (1) applies even though the place the information system supporting an electronic address is located may be different from the place the electronic communication is taken to have been received under section 25 .
(a) the time of receipt of the electronic communication is the time the electronic communication becomes capable of being retrieved by the addressee at an electronic address designated by the addressee; or
(b) the time of receipt of the electronic communication at another electronic address of the addressee is the time when both— (i) the electronic communication has become capable of being retrieved by the addressee at that address; and (ii) the addressee has become aware that the electronic communication has been sent to that address.
(i) the electronic communication has become capable of being retrieved by the addressee at that address; and
(ii) the addressee has become aware that the electronic communication has been sent to that address.
(i) the electronic communication has become capable of being retrieved by the addressee at that address; and
(ii) the addressee has become aware that the electronic communication has been sent to that address.
sec.25
Place of dispatch and receipt
sec.25 Place of dispatch and receipt
Unless otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee of an electronic communication—
the electronic communication is taken to have been dispatched at the place the originator has its place of business; and
the electronic communication is taken to have been received at the place the addressee has its place of business.
For the application of subsection (1) to an electronic communication—
a party’s place of business is assumed to be the location indicated by the party, unless another party demonstrates the party making the indication does not have a place of business at that location; and
if a party has not indicated a place of business and has only one place of business, it is to be assumed that place is the party’s place of business; and
if a party has not indicated a place of business and has more than one place of business, the place of business is that which has the closest relationship to the underlying transaction, having regard to the circumstances known to or contemplated by the parties at any time before or at the conclusion of the transaction; and
if a party has not indicated a place of business and has more than one place of business, but paragraph (c) does not apply—it is to be assumed the party’s principal place of business is the party’s only place of business; and
if a party is an individual and does not have a place of business—it is to be assumed the party’s place of business is the place of the party’s habitual residence.
A location is not a place of business merely because that is—
where equipment and technology supporting an information system used by a party are located; or
where the information system may be accessed by other parties.
The sole fact that a party makes use of a domain name or electronic mail address connected to a specific country does not create a presumption that its place of business is located in that country.
s 25 sub 2013 No. 35 s 74
(sec.25-ssec.1) Unless otherwise agreed between the originator and the addressee of an electronic communication— the electronic communication is taken to have been dispatched at the place the originator has its place of business; and the electronic communication is taken to have been received at the place the addressee has its place of business.
(sec.25-ssec.2) For the application of subsection (1) to an electronic communication— a party’s place of business is assumed to be the location indicated by the party, unless another party demonstrates the party making the indication does not have a place of business at that location; and if a party has not indicated a place of business and has only one place of business, it is to be assumed that place is the party’s place of business; and if a party has not indicated a place of business and has more than one place of business, the place of business is that which has the closest relationship to the underlying transaction, having regard to the circumstances known to or contemplated by the parties at any time before or at the conclusion of the transaction; and if a party has not indicated a place of business and has more than one place of business, but paragraph (c) does not apply—it is to be assumed the party’s principal place of business is the party’s only place of business; and if a party is an individual and does not have a place of business—it is to be assumed the party’s place of business is the place of the party’s habitual residence.
(sec.25-ssec.3) A location is not a place of business merely because that is— where equipment and technology supporting an information system used by a party are located; or where the information system may be accessed by other parties.
(sec.25-ssec.4) The sole fact that a party makes use of a domain name or electronic mail address connected to a specific country does not create a presumption that its place of business is located in that country.
(a) the electronic communication is taken to have been dispatched at the place the originator has its place of business; and
(b) the electronic communication is taken to have been received at the place the addressee has its place of business.
(a) a party’s place of business is assumed to be the location indicated by the party, unless another party demonstrates the party making the indication does not have a place of business at that location; and
(b) if a party has not indicated a place of business and has only one place of business, it is to be assumed that place is the party’s place of business; and
(c) if a party has not indicated a place of business and has more than one place of business, the place of business is that which has the closest relationship to the underlying transaction, having regard to the circumstances known to or contemplated by the parties at any time before or at the conclusion of the transaction; and
(d) if a party has not indicated a place of business and has more than one place of business, but paragraph (c) does not apply—it is to be assumed the party’s principal place of business is the party’s only place of business; and
(e) if a party is an individual and does not have a place of business—it is to be assumed the party’s place of business is the place of the party’s habitual residence.
(a) where equipment and technology supporting an information system used by a party are located; or
(b) where the information system may be accessed by other parties.
ch.2-pt.3-div.3
Other provisions
Other provisions
sec.26
Attribution of electronic communications
sec.26 Attribution of electronic communications
For a State law, unless otherwise agreed between the purported originator of an electronic communication and the addressee of the communication, the purported originator of the communication is bound by the communication only if it was sent by the purported originator or with the purported originator’s authority.
Subsection (1) does not limit a State law that provides for—
conduct engaged in by a person within the scope of the person’s actual or apparent authority to be attributed to another person; or
a person to be bound by conduct engaged in by another person within the scope of the other person’s actual or apparent authority.
(sec.26-ssec.1) For a State law, unless otherwise agreed between the purported originator of an electronic communication and the addressee of the communication, the purported originator of the communication is bound by the communication only if it was sent by the purported originator or with the purported originator’s authority.
(sec.26-ssec.2) Subsection (1) does not limit a State law that provides for— conduct engaged in by a person within the scope of the person’s actual or apparent authority to be attributed to another person; or a person to be bound by conduct engaged in by another person within the scope of the other person’s actual or apparent authority.
(a) conduct engaged in by a person within the scope of the person’s actual or apparent authority to be attributed to another person; or
(b) a person to be bound by conduct engaged in by another person within the scope of the other person’s actual or apparent authority.
ch.2-pt.4
Additional provisions applying to contracts involving electronic communication
Additional provisions applying to contracts involving electronic communication
sec.26A
Application and operation of this part
sec.26A Application and operation of this part
This part applies to the use of electronic communications in connection with the formation or performance of a contract between parties where the proper law of the contract is (or would on its formation be) under the State law, and so applies—
whether some or all of the parties are located within Australia or elsewhere; and
whether the contract is for business purposes, for personal, family or household purposes, or for other purposes.
s 26A ins 2013 No. 35 s 75
(a) whether some or all of the parties are located within Australia or elsewhere; and
(b) whether the contract is for business purposes, for personal, family or household purposes, or for other purposes.
sec.26B
Invitation to treat regarding contracts
sec.26B Invitation to treat regarding contracts
A proposal to form a contract made through one or more electronic communications that—
is not addressed to one or more specific parties; and
is generally accessible to parties making use of information systems;
is to be considered as an invitation to make offers, unless it clearly indicates the intention of the party making the proposal to be bound in case of acceptance.
Subsection (1) extends to proposals that make use of interactive applications for the placement of orders through information systems.
s 26B ins 2013 No. 35 s 75
(sec.26B-ssec.1) A proposal to form a contract made through one or more electronic communications that— is not addressed to one or more specific parties; and is generally accessible to parties making use of information systems; is to be considered as an invitation to make offers, unless it clearly indicates the intention of the party making the proposal to be bound in case of acceptance.
(sec.26B-ssec.2) Subsection (1) extends to proposals that make use of interactive applications for the placement of orders through information systems.
(a) is not addressed to one or more specific parties; and
(b) is generally accessible to parties making use of information systems;
sec.26C
Use of automated message system for contract formation—non-intervention of individual
sec.26C Use of automated message system for contract formation—non-intervention of individual
A contract formed by—
the interaction of an automated message system and an individual; or
the interaction of automated message systems;
is not invalid, void or unenforceable on the sole ground that no individual reviewed or intervened in each of the individual actions carried out by the automated message systems or the resulting contract.
s 26C ins 2013 No. 35 s 75
(a) the interaction of an automated message system and an individual; or
(b) the interaction of automated message systems;
sec.26D
Error in electronic communication regarding contracts
sec.26D Error in electronic communication regarding contracts
This section applies in relation to a statement, declaration, demand, notice or request, including an offer and the acceptance of an offer, that the parties are required to make or choose to make in connection with the formation or performance of a contract.
If—
an individual makes an input error in an electronic communication exchanged with the automated message system of another party; and
the automated message system does not provide the person with an opportunity to correct the error;
the person, or the party on whose behalf the person was acting, has the right to withdraw the portion of the electronic communication in which the input error was made if—
the person, or the party on whose behalf the person was acting, notifies the other party of the error as soon as possible after having learned of the error and indicates that the person made an error in the electronic communication; and
the person, or the party on whose behalf the person was acting, has not used or received any material benefit or value from the goods or services, if any, received from the other party.
The right of withdrawal of a portion of an electronic communication under this section is not of itself a right to rescind or otherwise terminate a contract.
The consequences (if any) of the exercise of the right of withdrawal of a portion of an electronic communication under this section are to be determined in accordance with any applicable rule of law.
s 26D ins 2013 No. 35 s 75
(sec.26D-ssec.1) This section applies in relation to a statement, declaration, demand, notice or request, including an offer and the acceptance of an offer, that the parties are required to make or choose to make in connection with the formation or performance of a contract.
(sec.26D-ssec.2) If— an individual makes an input error in an electronic communication exchanged with the automated message system of another party; and the automated message system does not provide the person with an opportunity to correct the error; the person, or the party on whose behalf the person was acting, has the right to withdraw the portion of the electronic communication in which the input error was made if— the person, or the party on whose behalf the person was acting, notifies the other party of the error as soon as possible after having learned of the error and indicates that the person made an error in the electronic communication; and the person, or the party on whose behalf the person was acting, has not used or received any material benefit or value from the goods or services, if any, received from the other party.
(sec.26D-ssec.3) The right of withdrawal of a portion of an electronic communication under this section is not of itself a right to rescind or otherwise terminate a contract.
(sec.26D-ssec.4) The consequences (if any) of the exercise of the right of withdrawal of a portion of an electronic communication under this section are to be determined in accordance with any applicable rule of law.
(a) an individual makes an input error in an electronic communication exchanged with the automated message system of another party; and
(b) the automated message system does not provide the person with an opportunity to correct the error;
(c) the person, or the party on whose behalf the person was acting, notifies the other party of the error as soon as possible after having learned of the error and indicates that the person made an error in the electronic communication; and
(d) the person, or the party on whose behalf the person was acting, has not used or received any material benefit or value from the goods or services, if any, received from the other party.
sec.26E
Application of Act in relation to contracts
sec.26E Application of Act in relation to contracts
Subject to subsection (2) , sections 8 and 23 to 25 apply to—
a transaction constituted by or relating to a contract; or
an electronic communication relating to the formation or a performance of a contract;
in the same way as they apply to a transaction or electronic communication referred to in those provisions.
However, this part (including subsection (1) ) does not apply to or in relation to a contract to the extent that—
parts 1 to 3 would of their own force have the same effect as this part if this part applied; or
a law of another State (that is in substantially the same terms as parts 1 to 3 ) would of its own force have the same effect as this part if this part applied.
s 26E ins 2013 No. 35 s 75
(sec.26E-ssec.1) Subject to subsection (2) , sections 8 and 23 to 25 apply to— a transaction constituted by or relating to a contract; or an electronic communication relating to the formation or a performance of a contract; in the same way as they apply to a transaction or electronic communication referred to in those provisions.
(sec.26E-ssec.2) However, this part (including subsection (1) ) does not apply to or in relation to a contract to the extent that— parts 1 to 3 would of their own force have the same effect as this part if this part applied; or a law of another State (that is in substantially the same terms as parts 1 to 3 ) would of its own force have the same effect as this part if this part applied.
(a) a transaction constituted by or relating to a contract; or
(b) an electronic communication relating to the formation or a performance of a contract;
(a) parts 1 to 3 would of their own force have the same effect as this part if this part applied; or
(b) a law of another State (that is in substantially the same terms as parts 1 to 3 ) would of its own force have the same effect as this part if this part applied.
Source text: opening excerpt
Sourced from Queensland Legislation (legislation.qld.gov.au), CC BY 4.0.
ch.2-pt.1 General rule about validity of transactions for State laws
General rule about validity of transactions for State laws
sec.8 Validity of electronic transactions
sec.8 Validity of electronic transactions
A transaction is not invalid under a State law merely because it took place wholly or partly by 1 or more electronic communications.
However, the general rule in subsection (1) does not apply for the validity of a transaction to the extent to which another, more specific, provision of this chapter deals with its validity.
(sec.8-ssec.1) A transaction is not invalid under a State law merely because it took place wholly or partly by 1 or more electronic communications.
(sec.8-ssec.2) However, the general rule in subsection (1) does not apply for the validity of a transaction to the extent to which another, more specific, provision of this chapter deals with its validity.
ch.2-pt.2 Requirements under State laws
Requirements under State laws
ch.2-pt.2-div.1 Writing
Writing
sec.9 Application
sec.9 Application
This division applies to a requirement or permission to give information, whether the expression give, send or serve, or another expression, is used.
sec.10 Definitions for div 1
sec.10 Definitions for div 1
In this division—
give information includes, but is not limited to, the following—
make an application;
make or lodge a claim;
give, send or serve a notification;
lodge a return;
make a request;
make a declaration;
lodge or issue a certificate;
make, vary or cancel an election;
lodge an objection;
give a statement of reasons.
(a) make an application;
(b) make or lodge a claim;
(c) give, send or serve a notification;
(d) lodge a return;
(e) make a request;
(f) make a declaration;
(g) lodge or issue a certificate;
(h) make, vary or cancel an election;
(i) lodge an objection;
(j) give a statement of reasons.
sec.11 Requirement to give information in writing
sec.11 Requirement to give information in writing
If, under a State law, a person is required to give information in writing, the requirement is taken to have been met if the person gives the information by an electronic communication in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
The circumstances are that—
at the time the information was given, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
the person to whom the information is required to be given consents to the information being given by an electronic communication.
(sec.11-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person is required to give information in writing, the requirement is taken to have been met if the person gives the information by an electronic communication in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
(sec.11-ssec.2) The circumstances are that— at the time the information was given, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and the person to whom the information is required to be given consents to the information being given by an electronic communication.
Who pays, who decides and what behaviour changes are mandated flows from these mechanics. Parties who want to rely on electronic communications to meet State-law formality requirements pay the compliance cost of meeting the reasonableness, integrity and accessibility tests, and where required, obtaining recipient consent (ss 11-12, 14, 16-17, 19-21). Recipients decide whether to accept electronic forms and signatures by giving consent; absent consent the traditional (paper or specified) rule stands. Keepers, typically businesses or records custodians, bear the ongoing storage and metadata-recording burden required when keeping electronic communications (s 21). Contracting parties must address place and time-of-dispatch assumptions or accept statutory defaults (ss 23-25), and automated-system operators must design systems that allow correction or accept the limited withdrawal right described in s 26D.
The instrument does not itself set penalties or create new offences in the text provided. Enforcement and consequences therefore arise through the interaction with existing State laws and their remedies rather than new criminal penalties or administrative fines contained in the provisions supplied.
Main concepts
The legislation organises around a small number of repeated legal tests and concepts. These are the legal foci to which all practical compliance and litigation questions must be directed.
Non-invalidity by reason of electronic communication (s 8). The base rule is permissive. Transactions or acts are not invalid merely because they were made electronically. This is subject to more specific provisions in the same chapter which displace the general rule to the extent of inconsistency (s 8(2)).
Consent (ss 11-12, 14, 16-17, 19-21). Consent from the person to whom information, signatures or documents are to be given is a recurring requirement. Consent is an enabling condition for treating electronic delivery, signatures or production as equivalent to the paper or prescribed form.
Reasonable expectation of accessibility and usability for subsequent reference (ss 11, 12, 16-17, 19-21). The statute uses an objective reasonableness test at the time information is given, recorded or the document generated. The statutory phrase is “reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference” and is included in the tests for writing, production, recording and keeping electronic communications.
Integrity of information (ss 16, 17, 20, 21). For documents and kept electronic communications the statute requires that generation and keeping methods provide a reliable way of maintaining integrity, defined to mean that the information remains complete and unaltered apart from endorsements or immaterial changes arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display (ss 16(3), 17(3), 20(3), 21(3)).
Particular technology carve-outs (ss 13, 15, 18). Where another State law mandates a particular storage device, kind of electronic communication, an electronic signature however described, a unique electronic identifier, or a particular method for identifying an originator, those specific rules are preserved and the general permissive standards do not displace them.
Time and place rules (ss 23-25). Statutory defaults establish when an electronic communication is taken to be dispatched and received. Dispatch is when the communication leaves an information system under the originator’s control or when it is received if it has not left such a system (s 23). Receipt is when the message is capable of being retrieved at an electronic address designated by the addressee, with an assumption that reachability equals capability of retrieval unless agreed otherwise (s 24). Place of dispatch and receipt is taken to be the place of business of the originator and the addressee, with rules for determining place of business if multiple locations or no clear indication exist, and exclusions that equipment location alone is not a place of business (s 25).
Attribution and authority (s 26). A purported originator is bound only where the communication was sent by the purported originator or with their authority, unless otherwise agreed. The section does not limit State laws that attribute acts under principles of actual or apparent authority.
Contract-specific rules (ss 26A-26E). These sections apply the above rules to contract formation and performance where the proper law is a State law. They include rules about invitations to treat (s 26B), machine-formed contracts (s 26C), withdrawal rights for input errors against automated systems (s 26D), and the application of the chapter to contracts (s 26E).
These concepts generate recurring practical questions: what counts as consent, how to demonstrate the “reasonable expectation” of accessibility at the relevant time, what technical or procedural measures will prove the integrity of an electronic form, and how to record and retain the metadata required by s 21. The statute frames compliance as a combination of objective tests and parties’ choices, with contractual agreement able to vary the default timing, place and attribution rules.
Who it affects
The provisions allocate roles and burdens to identifiable categories of actors. The principal affected groups are originators, addressees, keepers, parties to contracts, and operators of automated message systems.
Originators. The person or entity that sends an electronic communication is treated as the originator. The statute imposes default rules about when a communication is dispatched and where that dispatch is taken to occur (ss 23, 25). Originators who want to ensure a particular time or place of dispatch can agree that with addressees to vary the defaults. Originators who rely on electronic signatures must ensure the method used identifies them and indicates their intention and is either as reliable as appropriate or proven in fact to have fulfilled those functions (s 14).
Addressees. The person or entity to whom information or a document is required to be given must consent to electronic delivery for writing, signature and production requirements to be met in the electronic form, unless a specific other law requires particular technology (ss 11-12, 14, 16-17). Addressees thus decide whether they will accept electronic communication in substitution for paper or prescribed forms. They also decide whether an electronic address is “designated” for receipt in the sense used in s 24.
Keepers. Persons required to keep information that was the subject of an electronic communication are specifically addressed by s 21. Keepers must maintain, or cause another to maintain, the information in electronic form for the period and must retain “additional information” sufficient to identify origin, destination and sent and received times, and ensure the integrity and accessibility of both the primary information and the additional information (s 21(2)(a)-(d)).
Parties to contracts. The contract-specific part applies to contracts whose proper law is under the State law (s 26A). Both businesses and consumers fall within that application, as the part applies whether the contract is for business or personal, family or household purposes (s 26A(1)(b)). Where an offer is made through generally accessible electronic means the proposer is treated as making an invitation to treat unless there is clear intention to be bound (s 26B).
Operators of automated message systems. Operators of systems that automatically interact with individuals or other systems are affected by s 26C (contracts not invalid solely because no human reviewed each action) and by s 26D (input error withdrawal rights where no correction opportunity was given). System designers therefore bear practical costs in how the interface handles errors and in preserving audit trails and correction opportunities, because failure to offer correction gives rise to a statutory right to withdraw certain communications.
Regulators and legal advisers. While not the statute’s direct addressees, regulators and advisers will be engaged because the statute preserves other State law technical requirements (ss 13, 15, 18) and construing “reasonable expectation,” “readily accessible” and “integrity” will require interpretive guidance when disputes arise.
Who pays. The principal financial burdens fall on originators and keepers: originators must adopt reliable signature and delivery methods and obtain recipient consent where required; keepers must provide storage, integrity controls and metadata retention capabilities. Addressees who refuse electronic delivery avoid the cost of maintaining electronic acceptance, but may incur administrative costs when receiving paper. Automated system operators may bear development costs to provide correction opportunities or to instrument logging for later proof.
Who decides. Many duties are conditional on the addressee’s consent or on parties’ agreements about dispatch/receipt/place. Where parties do not agree, statutory defaults determine time and place of dispatch/receipt (ss 23-25) and attribution (s 26). The statute therefore invests significant decision-making power in the parties, subject to its objective tests.
Key duties and rights
The legislative text creates a set of duties (often conditional) and statutory rights. The statute’s structure is largely permissive but conditional on meeting tests. Key duties and rights are as follows.
Duties
Duty to obtain or respect consent. A repeated statutory condition is that the person to whom information, signature, or document is required to be given must consent to the use of electronic communication (ss 11(2)(b), 12(2)(b), 14(1)(c), 16(2)(c), 17(2)(c), 20(2)(c)). Absent consent, the statutory conversion does not operate.
Duty to ensure accessibility and usability for subsequent reference. Where writing, recordkeeping, production or keeping requirements are to be satisfied electronically, the person giving, recording or keeping the information must ensure that, at the relevant time, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible and usable for subsequent reference (ss 11(2)(a), 12(2)(a), 16(2)(b), 17(2)(b), 19(2)(a), 20(2)(b), 21(2)(a), 21(2)(d)).
Duty to maintain integrity. For electronic production and keeping of documents, the method must be reliable for maintaining the integrity of the information when generated or kept (ss 16(2)(a), 17(2)(a), 20(2)(a), 21(2)(b)). Integrity in the statute means remaining complete and unaltered except for endorsements or immaterial changes in the normal course of communication, storage or display (ss 16(3), 17(3), 20(3), 21(3)).
Duty to retain additional metadata when keeping electronic communications. A keeper must also ensure that during the prescribed period they keep sufficient additional information to identify the origin and destination of the communication, and when it was sent and received (s 21(2)(c)-(d)).
Duty to comply with regulations requiring specific storage devices. If a regulation prescribes a particular data storage device, the electronic keeping obligation is only satisfied if that device requirement is met (ss 19(2)(b), 20(2)(c), 21(2)(e)).
Duty to use reliable signature methods. When a signature is required, the person relying on electronic means must use a method to identify the person and indicate intention, with the method either as reliable as appropriate for the purposes or proven in fact to have fulfilled those functions (s 14(1)(a)-(b)).
Rights
Right to use electronic communications to satisfy State-law requirements. Provided the statutory tests are met, persons have a positive right to satisfy writing, signature, production, recording and keeping requirements by electronic means (ss 11-12, 14, 16-17, 19-21).
Right to withdraw part of an electronic communication made in error against an automated message system. Where an input error occurs and the system did not allow correction, the individual has the right to withdraw the portion of the communication in which the error was made, provided the person notifies the other party as soon as possible and has not used or received material benefit or value from goods or services received (s 26D(2)).
Right to contract formation by automated systems. Contracts formed by automated message systems or interactions between such systems and individuals are not invalid solely because no individual reviewed or intervened in each action (s 26C).
Rights to contractual variation of defaults. Parties can agree to vary defaults about time and place of dispatch and receipt and attribution, so contract drafters retain the right to supersede statutory rules by agreement (ss 23-26).
Conditionalities and limitations
Preservation of other State laws. Where another State law prescribes particular technical requirements or devices, the permissive conversion to electronic form does not apply and those laws remain effective (ss 13, 15, 18).
Exception for more specific provisions. The general non-invalidity rule in s 8 does not apply to the extent a more specific provision in the chapter deals with the validity of the transaction (s 8(2)). Similarly, the contracts part does not apply to the extent parts 1 to 3 would have the same effect of their own force or another State law in substantially similar terms would have that effect (s 26E(2)).
Practical interaction of duties and rights creates risk: the rights to use electronic processes are conditional on consent and objective tests that can be contested, and the duties to keep metadata and integrity evidence create ongoing operational costs for keepers and originators.
Penalties and enforcement
The text supplied contains no express criminal penalties, civil fines, or named enforcement powers specific to the electronic transactions provisions. The statutory scheme instead operates primarily by altering the legal effect of acts and records under State laws rather than by prescribing new sanctioning regimes.
Consequences and enforcement mechanisms should be read as follows, based strictly on the provided provisions:
Compliance produces substantive legal effect. The sections operate to deem requirements satisfied where the statutory tests are met. The “penalty” for failure to meet those tests is the absence of that deeming effect, which means the underlying State law requirement may remain unsatisfied, with whatever consequences that State law already attaches. For example, if a regulation requires a document to be kept on a particular kind of data storage device and that requirement is not met, the alternative electronic keeping will not be effective under the statute (ss 20(2)(c), 21(2)(e)).
Civil remedies lie in existing State law. Where the electronic form is alleged to be invalid or insufficient, enforcement, remedies and sanctions will usually be those contained in the underlying State law. The instrument preserves other State laws that create obligations and consequences (s 13, s 15, s 18, s 26E(2)). Therefore, enforcement actions are likely to be pursued under those State laws rather than under these provisions.
Attribution, evidence and civil liability. Sections such as s 26 on attribution and the integrity provisions (ss 16, 17, 20, 21) affect evidential questions in disputes. For example, a recipient can bind a purported originator only where the communication was sent by the originator or with authority, except where otherwise agreed (s 26(1)). The parties will therefore litigate to establish whether a method was as reliable as appropriate or proven in fact (s 14), or whether the integrity condition was met.
No specific enforcement body specified. The instrument does not create a new body to supervise or audit compliance with electronic transaction standards. That role remains with existing administrative or judicial mechanisms under State law.
Contractual remedies partly preserved. The contract-specific provisions (ss 26A-26E) create statutory defaults but do not specify remedies for breach beyond general rules of contract and law. The right to withdraw an erroneous communication under s 26D is procedural and its consequences are to be determined under applicable rules of law (s 26D(4)).
In short, the provided text modifies the legal consequences of certain acts and imposes technical compliance duties without creating a standalone enforcement or penalty regime. Enforcement therefore will be exercised under the State laws to which these provisions refer and through normal judicial or administrative processes available in those State laws.
How it interacts with other laws
Interaction with other State laws is a central structural feature of the statute. The instrument is explicitly designed to be a default framework that State laws can displace or supplement in specified ways.
Preservation of specialised technical requirements
Where a State law requires information to be given or produced using a particular data storage device or particular kind of electronic communication, the conversion rules in ss 11-12, 16-17, 19-21 do not operate to override those prescriptions (ss 13, 15, 18). The statutes therefore coexist with specialised regulatory regimes that mandate specific technologies, methods or identifiers.
Signatures and unique identification
Section 15 expressly preserves State laws that require an electronic communication to contain an electronic signature however described, to contain a unique identification in electronic form, or to require a particular method to identify the originator and indicate intention. That means statutes imposing authentication regimes, statutory signatures, or unique digital identifiers can and do remain effective notwithstanding the permissive provisions here.
Attribution and agency
Section 26 leaves intact State laws that attribute conduct to others under agency principles or provide that a person is bound by conduct engaged in by another within actual or apparent authority. The statutory defaults on attribution therefore sit alongside, and do not displace, established rules of agency and attribution in State law.
Application to contracts and overlap with parts 1-3
The contract-specific provisions apply unless parts 1-3 would of their own force have the same effect as this part, or another State law in substantially similar terms would of its own force have the same effect (s 26E(2)). This is a non-extension clause that prevents duplication or conflict where an existing law already produces the same outcomes.
Timing and territorial issues
The defaults about time and place of dispatch and receipt apply even if the information system supporting an electronic address is located in a different place than that at which the communication is taken to have been dispatched or received (ss 23(2), 24(3)). Section 25 specifies how place of business is determined and excludes equipping or technology location as a place of business. These rules therefore interact with choice of law and territorial jurisdiction considerations in State law claims.
Regulations
Several sections expressly note that where a regulation requires particular storage devices or methods, the statutory tests are met only if the regulation’s requirement is met (ss 19(2)(b), 20(2)(c), 21(2)(e)). The instrument therefore anticipates subordinate legislation that may modify technical compliance obligations.
Evidence and civil procedure
The integrity and accessibility tests (ss 16, 17, 20-21) will affect evidentiary disputes about the authenticity, completeness and reliability of electronic records in litigation under State laws. The statute frames these as statutory factors, but whether evidence is admissible, persuasive, or dispositive remains within the bounds of the relevant State law and rules of evidence.
No displacement of remedies
The instrument does not provide express remedies or penalties of its own in the text provided. Remedies available for non-compliance therefore remain those in the underlying State laws, regulations and common law.
Overall, the statutory architecture establishes a flexible default mechanism while expressly preserving the primacy of other State laws where those laws contain more specific technical or procedural requirements or where existing parts of the legislative scheme would otherwise duplicate the effect.
Amendment history
The legislative text contains in-line amendment annotations that identify several post-enactment changes. The document does not provide a full chronology beyond these inserted notes, but the following entries are present in the text as provided.
Sections 14 and 15. The text records that s 14 was amended in 2013 (2013 No. 35 s 72) and s 15 was amended in 2013 (2013 No. 35 s 73). The effect of those amendments is not described in the material supplied beyond the amendment flags.
Section 16. The production of document provision carries amendment notes: amended 2002 No. 34 s 17 and 2010 No. 42 s 214 sch. These indicate that s 16 has been amended at least twice, once in 2002 and once in 2010.
Section 20. The keeping written documents provision has amendment notes similar to s 16: amended 2002 No. 34 s 17 and 2010 No. 42 s 214 sch.
Section 23 and 24 and 25. Each has a note “sub 2013 No. 35 s 74” indicating substitutional amendments were made in 2013, at least to the text of those sections.
Contract part insertions. Sections 26A through 26E are marked as inserted in 2013 by 2013 No. 35 s 75. Additionally, s 26B, s 26C, s 26D, and s 26E each carry the same insertion note, confirming that the contract-specific provisions were added as a package in 2013.
Section 14 cross-referenced the amendment note earlier mentioned and is flagged with the 2013 amendment.
The annotation style shows the statute has been the subject of at least two waves of amendment activity: earlier technical amendments to production and keeping requirements (2002 and 2010), and a suite of modernisation measures in 2013 that substituted time/place rules and added the contract-related provisions.
The supplied text does not include dates of original enactment, explanatory memoranda, or the precise textual changes effected by each amendment. The amendment notes are limited to statutory citations and years. Researchers needing a full legislative history will need to consult the State law’s consolidated version or parliamentary records to reconstruct the original text and to read the amendment instruments themselves.
Litigation history
The supplied text does not include case law citations, judicial history, or references to litigation that has interpreted the provisions. No judicial decisions are named or summarised in the material given.
Consequently, from the source alone:
There is no recorded litigation history in the provided text. No reported decisions, appeals, or doctrinal treatment appear.
Practical implication. Because the statutory tests (for example, “reasonable to expect”, “readily accessible”, “as reliable as appropriate”, and “proven in fact”) are fact-intensive and discretionary, these sections are likely to generate litigation in practice, but the supplied text does not supply any reported judicial interpretations to guide how courts have applied the standards.
Evidence and disputes. The absence of cited decisions in the text means practitioners must rely on the statutory language itself for now when advising clients or litigating, and must watch for court developments that will clarify what kinds of technical measures will meet the integrity, accessibility and reliability thresholds.
If a user requires existing judicial interpretations or litigation history, the source provided does not supply them and further research in case law databases or State reporting services will be required.
Gotchas
The statute contains multiple practical traps for parties who treat electronic use as a simple substitution for paper. The following operational and legal “gotchas” emerge directly from the text.
Consent is central but undefined. Many deeming conditions require the person to whom information, signature or documents are required to be given to consent to electronic delivery (ss 11(2)(b), 12(2)(b), 14(1)(c), 16(2)(c), 17(2)(c), 20(2)(c)). The statute does not define how consent must be manifested, documented or withdrawn. Absent a contractual or regulatory mechanism specifying consent mechanics, proving consent in a dispute will depend on surrounding facts and likely on records, which means parties should document consent proactively.
“Reasonable to expect” is an ex ante standard. Multiple sections use an ex ante objective reasonableness test about accessibility at the time the information was given or recorded (for example ss 11(2)(a), 19(2)(a), 21(2)(a)). In practice this requires parties to show that at the moment of generation or delivery it was reasonable to expect continued accessibility. Post-hoc failures of access may still meet the statutory test if they were not reasonably predictable at the time, but proving that fact may be contested.
Integrity defined narrowly but operationally exacting. Integrity is maintained only if the information remains complete and unaltered except for endorsements or immaterial changes arising in normal communication, storage or display (ss 16(3), 17(3), 20(3), 21(3)). System-generated conversions, format migrations, or automated transformations may be characterised as material changes unless processes and logs demonstrate immateriality. The statute places an evidential burden on originators and keepers to show the reliability of methods used.
Keeper metadata obligations. Section 21 requires keepers to also keep additional information sufficient to identify origin, destination and sent and received times. Failure to keep that metadata will defeat the statutory deeming of compliance. In practice this requires robust logging and retention policies beyond mere content storage.
Regulations may still prescribe specific devices. Several sections expressly caveat that if a regulation prescribes a particular kind of storage device, the electronic keeping obligation is only satisfied if that device is used (ss 19(2)(b), 20(2)(c), 21(2)(e)). Entities cannot rely solely on compliance with the Act if subordinate regulation imposes a different technical standard.
Signatures: two alternative tests. Section 14 offers two alternative ways to meet a signature test: a method that is as reliable as appropriate to the purpose, or a method proven in fact to have fulfilled the identification and intention functions, by itself or with further evidence. This leaves open both prospective design standards and retrospective proof. Relying on ad hoc or minimal methods risks later failure to meet either test.
Time and place defaults may be manipulated. The statute assumes parties’ indicated place of business unless disproved (s 25(2)(a)), and excludes merely the location of equipment from being a place of business (s 25(3)). Parties that fail to indicate place of business or that have multiple locations may face litigation over which place has the “closest relationship” to the transaction. Domain names and email addresses do not create place presumptions (s 25(4)), but absence of a clear address can leave parties subject to statutory assumptions that may be unfavourable.
Automated systems and withdrawal rights are narrow. Section 26D provides a right of withdrawal only where an individual makes an input error, the automated system did not provide an opportunity to correct the error, the person notifies the other party as soon as possible, and the person has not used or received material benefit or value. The right is not an automatic rescission right and its practical effect depends on applicable rules of law (s 26D(3)-(4)). Failure to provide correction opportunities can create exposure, but the remedy is conditional and its consequences uncertain.
No new penalties in text supplied. There are no express penalties in the material provided. Non-compliance therefore results in the underlying State-law consequences rather than a dedicated enforcement regime under this chapter. Parties should assess what sanctions the specific State law creates.
Discrepancy between “capable of being retrieved” and actual awareness. Section 24 treats receipt as the time the message becomes capable of being retrieved at a designated address, and provides for a different test where an addressee becomes aware that a message has been sent to another address. This creates potential disputes about whether an addressee was reasonably capable of retrieval versus actually aware, and parties who rely on timely notification should document both network delivery and acknowledgements.
These are concrete operational risks that arise from the statutory wording. Each is a point where evidential or factual dispute is likely and where parties should build procedural controls to avoid losing the benefit of the statutory deeming rules.
How to comply
Compliance under the statute requires aligning technological, contractual and recordkeeping practices to the statutory tests. The following practical checklist maps the statutory conditions into concrete steps and controls that originators, addressees, keepers and automated system operators should consider.
Document consent processes
Obtain explicit documented consent where State-law requirements must be satisfied electronically (ss 11(2)(b), 12(2)(b), 14(1)(c), 16(2)(c), 17(2)(c), 20(2)(c)). Consent can be recorded in written agreements, click-through consents with clear audit trails, or otherwise documented in logs that demonstrate the addressee’s agreement to accept electronic forms.
Where consent is implied by conduct in a contractual setting, record the conduct and make it contractually explicit if possible.
Design for demonstrable accessibility at the relevant time
Ensure systems and storage solutions are configured to make documents “readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference” at the time they are generated or received (ss 11(2)(a), 16(2)(b), 19(2)(a), 20(2)(b), 21(2)(a)).
Maintain retention schedules and technology roadmaps that show expected accessibility across the retention period. Document migrations, format changes and the rationale for any media migration as part of an audit trail.
Implement integrity controls and evidentiary logging
Implement cryptographic hashes, checksums, audit logs, tamper-evident storage or equivalent measures to demonstrate that the method of generating or keeping an electronic form provided a reliable way of maintaining integrity (ss 16(2)(a), 20(2)(a), 21(2)(b)).
Keep logs of endorsements and of any immaterial changes that occur through normal processes to show they fall within the statutory exception (ss 16(3), 17(3), 20(3), 21(3)).
Collect and retain metadata required for keepers
For information that was the subject of an electronic communication, design retention to also store origin, destination and sent/received times as additional information (s 21(2)(c)). Ensure this metadata is readily retrievable and preserved against loss for the statutory retention period.
Build signature processes to satisfy either statutory test
Adopt signature methods that are “as reliable as appropriate for the purposes” in practice, taking into account transaction risk, regulatory context and any relevant agreement (s 14(1)(b)(i)).
Alternatively, where novel methods are used, ensure there is demonstrable proof that the method in fact identified the signer and indicated intention, supported by further evidence when necessary (s 14(1)(b)(ii)). Maintain logs and corroborating evidence.
Check for regulatory or statute-specific device or method requirements
Review the corpus of State laws and subordinate regulations that apply to your activities for any prescriptive requirements regarding data storage devices, electronic signature forms, unique electronic identifiers or particular methods of originator identification (ss 13, 15, 18). Where such requirements exist, comply with them; the general permissive rules will not displace them.
Agree contractual overrides to statutory defaults
If parties wish to vary the defaults on dispatch and receipt timing or place of business, agree express contract terms (ss 23-25). Specify designated electronic addresses, business locations for dispatch/receipt, and the agreed legal effects of the use of particular information systems.
Design automated message systems to provide correction opportunities
Where an interactive or automated ordering or contracting system is used, provide functionality that allows users to review and correct inputs before final submission. Doing so reduces the chance an individual will later exercise the limited withdrawal right in s 26D and avoids uncertainty about the consequences.
Keep records of place of business indicators
Indicate and record the party’s place of business clearly where possible to avoid default assumptions under s 25. If multiple locations exist, document which location has the closest relationship to particular transactions to reduce disputes.
Prepare operational policies and audit trails
Develop internal policies that document how the enterprise will meet “reasonable to expect” and “reliability” tests, including retention schedules, format migration policies, integrity verification procedures and incident response processes for data loss or corruption.
Conduct periodic audits that produce demonstrable evidence of compliance with the statutory tests and capture any changes to systems that may affect accessibility or integrity.
Train staff and allocate responsibilities
Allocate responsibilities for consent capture, metadata retention, integrity verification and dispute handling among legal, IT and records teams to ensure that when an evidentiary question arises the organisation has the records required by the statute.
Review contracts and customer terms
Amend consumer and business terms to make clear whether interactive proposals are invitations to treat or intended to be offers, to avoid uncertainty under s 26B.
State how errors in inputs will be handled, whether the counterparty will accept corrections and what remedies apply.
By mapping statutory conditions into operational controls and contractual language, entities can reduce the risk that a court later finds that the statutory deeming did not apply. The emphasis in the statute on ex ante reasonableness and demonstrable integrity means contemporaneous documentation and system design are the principal means of proving compliance.
(a) at the time the information was given, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
(b) the person to whom the information is required to be given consents to the information being given by an electronic communication.
sec.12 Permission to give information in writing
sec.12 Permission to give information in writing
If, under a State law, a person is permitted to give information in writing, the person may give the information by an electronic communication in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
The circumstances are that—
at the time the information was given, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
the person to whom the information is permitted to be given consents to the information being given by an electronic communication.
(sec.12-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person is permitted to give information in writing, the person may give the information by an electronic communication in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
(sec.12-ssec.2) The circumstances are that— at the time the information was given, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and the person to whom the information is permitted to be given consents to the information being given by an electronic communication.
(a) at the time the information was given, it was reasonable to expect the information would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
(b) the person to whom the information is permitted to be given consents to the information being given by an electronic communication.
sec.13 Other particular laws not affected
sec.13 Other particular laws not affected
Sections 11 and 12 do not affect the operation of another State law that makes provision about requiring or permitting information to be given, in accordance with particular information technology requirements—
on a particular kind of data storage device; or
by a particular kind of electronic communication.
(a) on a particular kind of data storage device; or
(b) by a particular kind of electronic communication.
ch.2-pt.2-div.2 Signatures
Signatures
sec.14 Requirement for signature
sec.14 Requirement for signature
If, under a State law, a person’s signature is required, the requirement is taken to have been met for an electronic communication if—
a method is used to identify the person and to indicate the person’s intention in relation to the information communicated; and
the method used was either—
as reliable as appropriate for the purposes for which the electronic communication was generated or communicated, having regard to all the circumstances, including any relevant agreement; or
proven in fact to have fulfilled the functions described in paragraph (a) , by itself or together with further evidence; and
the person to whom the signature is required to be given consents to the requirement being met by using the method mentioned in paragraph (a) .
The reference in subsection (1) to a law that requires a signature includes a reference to a law that provides consequences for the absence of a signature.
s 14 amd 2013 No. 35 s 72
(sec.14-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person’s signature is required, the requirement is taken to have been met for an electronic communication if— a method is used to identify the person and to indicate the person’s intention in relation to the information communicated; and the method used was either— as reliable as appropriate for the purposes for which the electronic communication was generated or communicated, having regard to all the circumstances, including any relevant agreement; or proven in fact to have fulfilled the functions described in paragraph (a) , by itself or together with further evidence; and the person to whom the signature is required to be given consents to the requirement being met by using the method mentioned in paragraph (a) .
(sec.14-ssec.2) The reference in subsection (1) to a law that requires a signature includes a reference to a law that provides consequences for the absence of a signature.
(a) a method is used to identify the person and to indicate the person’s intention in relation to the information communicated; and
(b) the method used was either— (i) as reliable as appropriate for the purposes for which the electronic communication was generated or communicated, having regard to all the circumstances, including any relevant agreement; or (ii) proven in fact to have fulfilled the functions described in paragraph (a) , by itself or together with further evidence; and
(i) as reliable as appropriate for the purposes for which the electronic communication was generated or communicated, having regard to all the circumstances, including any relevant agreement; or
(ii) proven in fact to have fulfilled the functions described in paragraph (a) , by itself or together with further evidence; and
(c) the person to whom the signature is required to be given consents to the requirement being met by using the method mentioned in paragraph (a) .
(i) as reliable as appropriate for the purposes for which the electronic communication was generated or communicated, having regard to all the circumstances, including any relevant agreement; or
(ii) proven in fact to have fulfilled the functions described in paragraph (a) , by itself or together with further evidence; and
sec.15 Other particular laws not affected
sec.15 Other particular laws not affected
Section 14 does not affect the operation of another State law that makes provision for or in relation to requiring—
an electronic communication to contain an electronic signature, however described; or
an electronic communication to contain a unique identification in an electronic form; or
a particular method to be used for an electronic communication to identify the originator of the communication and to indicate the originator’s intention in relation to the information communicated.
s 15 amd 2013 No. 35 s 73
(a) an electronic communication to contain an electronic signature, however described; or
(b) an electronic communication to contain a unique identification in an electronic form; or
(c) a particular method to be used for an electronic communication to identify the originator of the communication and to indicate the originator’s intention in relation to the information communicated.
ch.2-pt.2-div.3 Production of document
Production of document
sec.16 Requirement to produce document
sec.16 Requirement to produce document
If, under a State law, a person is required to produce a document that is in the form of paper, an article or other material, the requirement is taken to have been met if the person produces, by an electronic communication, an electronic form of the document in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
The circumstances are that—
having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the communication was sent, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and
when the communication was sent, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
the person to whom the document is required to be produced consents to the production, by an electronic communication, of an electronic form of the document.
For subsection (2) (a) , the integrity of information contained in a document is maintained only if the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from—
the addition of any endorsement; or
any immaterial change;
arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display.
s 16 amd 2002 No. 34 s 17 ; 2010 No. 42 s 214 sch
(sec.16-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person is required to produce a document that is in the form of paper, an article or other material, the requirement is taken to have been met if the person produces, by an electronic communication, an electronic form of the document in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
(sec.16-ssec.2) The circumstances are that— having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the communication was sent, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and when the communication was sent, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and the person to whom the document is required to be produced consents to the production, by an electronic communication, of an electronic form of the document.
(sec.16-ssec.3) For subsection (2) (a) , the integrity of information contained in a document is maintained only if the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from— the addition of any endorsement; or any immaterial change; arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display.
(a) having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the communication was sent, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and
(b) when the communication was sent, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
(c) the person to whom the document is required to be produced consents to the production, by an electronic communication, of an electronic form of the document.
(a) the addition of any endorsement; or
(b) any immaterial change;
sec.17 Permission to produce a document
sec.17 Permission to produce a document
If, under a State law, a person is permitted to produce a document in the form of paper, an article or other material, then, instead of producing the document in that form, the person may produce, by an electronic communication, an electronic form of the document in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
The circumstances are that—
having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the communication was sent, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and
when the communication was sent, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and
the person to whom the document is permitted to be produced consents to the production, by an electronic communication, of an electronic form of the document.
For subsection (2) (a) , the integrity of information contained in a document is maintained only if the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from—
the addition of any endorsement; or
any immaterial change;
arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display.
(sec.17-ssec.1) If, under a State law, a person is permitted to produce a document in the form of paper, an article or other material, then, instead of producing the document in that form, the person may produce, by an electronic communication, an electronic form of the document in the circumstances stated in subsection (2) .
(sec.17-ssec.2) The circumstances are that— having regard to all the relevant circumstances when the communication was sent, the method of generating the electronic form of the document provided a reliable way of maintaining the integrity of the information contained in the document; and when the communication was sent, it was reasonable to expect the information contained in the electronic form of the document would be readily accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; and the person to whom the document is permitted to be produced consents to the production, by an electronic communication, of an electronic form of the document.
(sec.17-ssec.3) For subsection (2) (a) , the integrity of information contained in a document is maintained only if the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from— the addition of any endorsement; or any immaterial change; arising in the normal course of communication, storage or display.
(a) having regar
This is an opening excerpt, not the complete document.