Source: http://ulcc.ca/en/uniform-acts-new-order/older-uniform-acts/703-electronic-commerce/1650-electronic-commerce-act-annotated-1999
Timestamp: 2017-05-27 10:03:52
Document Index: 2707962

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 3', 'ART 1', 'art 1', 'art 1', 'art.\n25', 'art 2']

Civil SectionAnnual MeetingsUniform ActsGeneral Information & StatusDrafting ConventionsCurrent Uniform ActsOlder Uniform ActsWithdrawn Uniform ActsSiteMapHomeContact UsAbout UsHistory of the ConferenceCommuniquésWhat We DoConference LeadershipConstitution - BylawsPast PresidentsPress ReleasesRelease of Conference DocumentsTerms of UseCriminal Section Home | Uniform Acts | Older Uniform Acts | Electronic Commerce | Uniform Electronic Commerce Act Annotated 1999
Older Uniform ActsUniform Electronic Commerce Act Annotated 19991999 Winnipeg, MB Uniform Electronic Commerce Act
(c) "Government" means (i) the Government of [enacting jurisdiction];
[(iii) any city, metropolitan authority, town, village, township, district or [rural municipality or other municipal body, however designated, incorporated or established by or under a law of [enacting jurisdiction].] Comment: The definition of "electronic" intends to ensure that the application of the Act is not unduly restricted by technical descriptions. For example, digital imaging relies on optical storage, which is technically not electronic, but which is generally seen as properly subject to this Act. Likewise, new technologies may arise that fit within the principles of the Act that might be excluded by a literal reading of "electronic". The only limit is that the product must be in digital or other intangible form. This prevents the definition from extending to paper documents, which have similar capabilities as the electronic media.
Application 2. (1) Subject to this section, this Act applies in respect of [enacting jurisdiction] law. (2)The [appropriate authority] may, by [statutory instrument], specify provisions of or requirements under [enacting jurisdiction] law in respect of which this Act does not apply. (3) This Act does not apply in respect of (a) wills and their codicils;
(c) powers of attorney, to the extent that they are in respect of the financial affairs or personal care of an individual; (d) documents that create or transfer interests in land and that require registration to be effective against third parties. (4) Except for Part 3, this Act does not apply in respect of negotiable instruments, including negotiable documents of title. (5) Nothing in this Act limits the operation of any provision of [enacting jurisdiction] law that expressly authorizes, prohibits or regulates the use of electronic documents. (6) The [appropriate authority] may, by [statutory instrument], amend subsection (3) to add any document or class of documents, or to remove any document or class of documents previously added under this subsection. (7) For the purpose of subsection (5), the use of words and expressions like "in writing" and "signature" and other similar words and expressions does not by itself prohibit the use of electronic documents. Comment: The Act will apply to all legal rules within the authority of the enacting jurisdiction, whether in statute, regulation, order-in-council or common law. This section sets out a short list of exceptions, such as wills and land transfers. The principle of exclusion is not that such documents should not be created electronically. Rather, they seem to require more detailed rules, or more safeguards for their users, than can be established by a general purpose statute like this one.
Interpretation 4. The provisions of this Act relating to the satisfaction of a requirement of law apply whether the law creates an obligation or provides consequences for doing something or for not doing something. Comment: This section ensures that the enabling rules of the Uniform Act apply broadly to "requirements" to use paper, even if the law does not appear to create an obligation. For example, a statute may say "An acceptance in writing is valid", or "An acceptance not in writing is invalid", instead of "An acceptance must be in writing". The principle of the rule in either case may have been to ensure that oral communications would not be relied on. It was unlikely to have been intended to prohibit an acceptance by electronic document.
PART 1 PROVISION AND RETENTION OF INFORMATION
(2) Despite subsection (1), the consent of the Government to accept information in electronic form may not be inferred by its conduct but must be expressed by communication accessible to the public or to those likely to communicate with it for particular purposes. Comment: This section ensures that the Act is not used to compel people to use electronic documents against their will. Many people are still uncomfortable with such documents, and of course many others do not yet have the capacity to use them. Nothing "in this Act" requires the use of such documents. However, people can bind themselves to use them, by contract or by practice.
This consent rule does not undermine the usefulness of the Uniform Act, which aims at certainty, not compulsion. The Act seeks to give legal effect to electronic documents used by parties who want to use them. It does not give people a calculated or bad faith way out of transactions based on electronic communications, by "strategic" withdrawal of consent. The reality of consent and the effect of a purported withdrawal of consent will have to be judged on the circumstances of particular cases. Information coming into government has a special status. The general permission to use electronic communications may expose governments to an overwhelming variety of formats and media that they may not have the capacity to handle and that may not work for their particular purposes. Private sector entities can limit their exposure by contract; governments often deal with people with whom it has no contract. Part 1 therefore allows governments to set its own rules for incoming electronic documents. The "consent" to accept electronic records must be express, not implied, and it must be communicated to those likely to need to know it. This could be done by posting requirements on a web site, or by issuing a directive, or by more or less formal means depending on the circumstances. It could also be expressed in a particular contract, if the policy applied to all such contracts.
Requirement for information to be in writing 7. A requirement under [enacting jurisdiction] law that information be in writing is satisfied by information in electronic form if the information is accessible so as to be usable for subsequent reference.
Providing information in writing 8.(1) A requirement under [enacting jurisdiction] law for a person to provide information in writing to another person is satisfied by the provision of the information in an electronic document,
(a) if the electronic document that is provided to the other person is accessible by the other person and capable of being retained by the other person so as to be usable for subsequent reference, and (b) where the information is to be provided to the Government, if
(ii) the electronic document meets the information technology standards and acknowledgement rules, if any, established by the Government or part of Government, as the case may be. Comment: When the law requires someone to provide information to someone else in writing, then more is needed than mere accessibility. The recipient has to receive the document in a way that gives him or her control over what becomes of it. One cannot give notice in writing by holding up a text on paper for the other person to read. One must deliver a paper. This section therefore requires the information to be accessible for subsequent use, but also that the information be capable of retention by the person who is to be provided with the information. How it is made capable of retention is not specified, as different types of enterprise may use different means for different purposes. In some cases the information may be sent by e-mail; in others, it may be made available for printing or downloading, if the intended recipient is given notice that it is so accessible.
(a) if the information is provided in the same or substantially the same form and the electronic document is accessible by the other person and capable of being retained by the other person so as to be usable for subsequent reference, and (b) where the information is to be provided to the Government, if
Signatures 10. (1) A requirement under [enacting jurisdiction] law for the signature of a person is satisfied by an electronic signature. (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the [authority responsible for the requirement] may make a regulation that,
(b) the association of the electronic signature with the relevant electronic document shall be reliable for the purpose for which the electronic document was made, in the light of all the circumstances, including any relevant agreement and the time the electronic signature was made. (3) For the purposes of subsection (1), where the signature or signed document is to be provided to the Government, the requirement is satisfied only if
(b) the electronic document meets the information technology standards and requirements as to method and as to reliability of the signature, if any, established by the Government or part of Government, as the case may be. Comment: A signature may mean many things in law, but the essential function is to link a person with a document. A signature without a document is only an autograph. This section therefore makes an electronic signature, as defined, function as a signature in law. The definition requires that the information purporting to constitute the signature be created or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the document, and that it be associated in some way with the document. Someone who alleges that an electronic signature meets a signature requirement will have to prove these characteristics to the satisfaction of the court or other decision maker.
Signatures submitted to government must conform to information technology requirements and also to any rules about the method of making them or their reliability. Different departments may have different standards for such matters, depending on what they need to do with the signed information. The Uniform Act does not say how to show who signed an electronic document. Attribution is left to ordinary methods of proof, just as it is for documents on paper. The person who wishes to rely on any signature takes the risk that the signature is invalid, and this rule does not change for an electronic signature.
(b) where the document in original form is to be provided to a person, the electronic document that is provided to the person is accessible by the person and capable of being retained by the person so as to be usable for subsequent reference; and (c) where the document in original form is to be provided to the Government, (i) the Government or the part of Government to which the information is to be provided has consented to accept electronic documents in satisfaction of the requirement; and
(a) the criterion for assessing integrity is whether the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from the introduction of any changes that arise in the normal course of communication, storage and display; (b) the standard of reliability required shall be assessed in the light of the purpose for which the document was made and in the light of all the circumstances. (3) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(b), an electronic document is deemed not to be capable of being retained if the person providing the electronic document inhibits the printing or storage of the electronic document by the recipient.
Whether document iscapable of being retained 12. An electronic document is deemed not to be capable of being retained if the person providing the electronic document inhibits the printing or storage of the electronic document by the recipient.Comment: Several sections require that a document must be capable of being retained in order to meet the legal requirement that information be provided. This section is intended to discourage the sender from doing anything that would inhibit the recipient from printing or storing the electronic document once it is received.
(c) where the electronic document was sent or received, information, if any, that identifies the origin and destination of the electronic document and the date and time when it was sent or received is also retained.Comment: People may wish to retain records in electronic form, whether the records were created electronically or on paper. Paper documents may be made electronic by scanning, which makes the information treatable as data afterwards, or by imaging, which generally preserves a digital picture of the information that is not intended to be changed. In any event, the function of making people retain records is to retain the information contained in the record.
15. Nothing in this Part limits the operation of any requirement under [enacting jurisdiction] law for information to be posted or displayed in specified manner or for any information or document to be transmitted by a specified method. Comment: Sometimes particular forms of display are required, or particular forms of communication. The electronic document must also follow the other form rules. Sometimes such rules may mean that a paper document must be used. However, the words "in writing" or "signed" themselves do not constitute a "specified manner" or "specifed method" for these purposes, or the point of much the Act would be undermined. If the rules say that regular mail must be used to deliver information, the parties to the communication may agree on other means, if the source of those rules allows such variation, expressly or by implication.
16. (1) If a provision of [enacting jurisdiction] law requires a person to communicate information , the minister of the Crown responsible for the provision may prescribe electronic means to be used for the communication of the information and the use of those means satisfies that requirement. (2) If a statute of [enacting jurisdiction] sets out a form, the [authority responsible] for the form may make an electronic form that is substantially the same as the form set out in the statute and the electronic form is to be considered as the form set out in the statute.
(b) "prescribe" includes all manner of issuing, making and establishing, regardless of how it is designated. Comment: Much information must be submitted to government or to private persons on specific forms, set out in statute or more commonly prescribed in regulations. Rather than require governments to amend all the authorizing texts, this section allows them to provide electronic equivalents to the forms designed for and often presumed to be paper. The first subsection applies where information is to be provided but without a specified form, to allow the government to create a form. Subsection (2) deals with forms in statutes and subsection (3) with forms in regulations. Subsection (2) does not specify how the electronic equivalent of a statutory form should be created. Subsection (3) says that a form authorized to be made by regulation must be given its electronic equivalent by regulation. Enacting jurisdictions may choose whether they wish to allow for administrative forms, especially where a paper-based form is already presecribed.
17. (1) In the absence of an express provision in any [enacting jurisdiction] law that electronic means may not be used or that they must be used in specified ways, a minister of the Crown in right of [enacting jurisdiction] or an entity referred to in subparagraphs 1(c)(ii) [or (iii)] may use electronic means to create, collect, receive, store, transfer, distribute, publish or otherwise deal with documents or information. (2) For the purpose of subsection (1), the use of words and expressions like "in writing" and "signature" and other similar words and expressions does not by itself constitute an express provision that electronic means may not be used. Comment: This section gives governments the right to use electronic communications internally and externally, and to convert incoming messages to electronic form. Unlike the following sections on communications from the public to the government, it does not require any opting in, but applies directly when the Act comes into force. This general permission yields to any direction by the legislature that electronic documents not be used. However, the mere use of terms such as "writing" or "signed" is not considered such a direction, since most of them date from a time when paper was presumed, not chosen expressly over electronic media.
(2) A payment that is authorized or required to be made by the Government may be made in electronic form in any manner specified by the [Receiver General] for the [enacting jurisdiction].Comment: To ensure the integrity of public accounts and accountability for public finances, payments to and by government are often subject to detailed statutory rules. This section allows the Receiver General or equivalent authority in the enacting jurisdiction to provide for electronic media of payment, for incoming or for outgoing payments, or both. The usual rules about authority and record-keeping would continue to apply to such payments.
Comment: This Part gives general guidance to points of law that may be in doubt in a world of electronic communications. Unlike the provisions of Part 1, this Part does not deal with specific requirements of the law. It applies to common law rules of contracts, and supplements them with a few rules that appear useful to resolve common difficulties in using such communications. Government communications are included in this Part. Definition of "electronic agent"
19. In this Part, "electronic agent" means a computer program or any electronic means used to initiate an action or to respond to an electronic documents or actions in whole or in part without review by a natural person at the time of the response or action. Comment: Computer transactions are largely automated transactions. The novelty ofelectronic commerce is less the automation than the electronic communications used to establish relationships that require legal effect. The forms of automation are changing, too. Businesses and individuals use "electronic agents", which are software programs, sometimes embedded in hardware, that can seek out information and respond to it or to incoming messages. This part deals with some of the legal effects of using such tools. The use of the term "electronic agent" is widespread. The law of agency however plays no part in this discussion. An electronic agent is a tool, not an agent in law.Formation and operation of contracts
20. (1) Unless the parties agree otherwise, an offer or the acceptance of an offer, or any other matter that is material to the formation or operation of a contract, may be expressed (a) by means of an electronic document; or (b) by an action in electronic form, including touching or clicking on an appropriately designated icon or place on a computer screen or otherwise
communicating electronically in a manner that is intended to express the offer, acceptance or other matter. (2) A contract shall not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely by reason that an electronic document was used in its formation. Comment: The Act does not purport to change the general law of contracts. This section ensures that electronic communications are capable of conveying the kinds of intention that are necessary to support contractual relations. In particular, actions that do not involve detailed language, such as clicking on icons on computer screens, are expressly made acceptable for contract purposes.
22. An electronic document made by a natural person with the electronic agent of another person has no legal effect and is not enforceable if the natural person made a material error in the document and (a) the electronic agent did not provide the natural person with an opportunity to prevent or correct the error; (b) the natural person notifies the other person of the error as soon as practicable when the natural person learns of it and indicates that he or she made an error in the electronic document; (c) the natural person takes reasonable steps, including steps that conform to the other person's instructions to return the consideration received, if any, as a result of the error or, if instructed to do so, to destroy the consideration; and (d) the natural person has not used or received any material benefit or value from the consideration, if any, received from the other person. Comment: The law has rules about the effect of mistakes. Particular concerns have been expressed about computer communications, however, for two reasons. First, it is easy to hit a key when typing quickly, or click a mouse on the wrong spot on a screen, and by doing so send a command with legal consequences ("the single keystroke error"). Second, much electronic commerce is done by electronic agents, as noted in the comment to the previous section. The electronic agents may not be programmed to respond to a subsequent message saying "I didn't mean that."
In addition, the section applies only if the legal entity to which the message was sent did not provide a method of preventing or correcting the error. The Act does not tell people how to do this, but one may imagine a message on a screen saying "You have ordered X at $Y. Is this correct?" If the person confirms the first order, this section would not apply. This provision gives online merchants a way of giving themselves a good deal of security against allegations of mistake, and encourages good business practices in everybody's interests.Time and place of sending and receipt of electronic documents
23. (1) Unless the originator and the addressee agree otherwise, an electronic document is sent when it enters an information system outside the control of the originator or, if the originator and the addressee are in the same information system, when it becomes capable of being retrieved and processed by the addressee. (2) An electronic document is presumed to be received by the addressee,
(b) if the originator or the addressee does not have a place of business, the references to "place of business" in subsection (3) are to be read as references to "habitual residence".Comment: Computer communications usually depend on intermediaries, whether privately contracted services like value-added networks (VANs) or public Internet service providers (ISPs) or others. On the Internet, messages travel in packets through unpredictable combinations of computers on their way to their destination. This complicates deciding when messages are sent and received, and where. The law often makes it important to know these things.
24. This Part applies to any action in connection with a contract of carriage of goods, including, but not limited to, (a) furnishing the marks, number, quantity or weight of goods; (b) stating or declaring the nature or value of goods; (c) issuing a receipt for goods; (d) confirming that goods have been loaded; (e) giving instructions to a carrier of goods; (f) claiming delivery of goods; (g) authorizing release of goods; (h) giving notice of loss of, or damage to, goods; (i) undertaking to deliver goods to a named person or a person authorized to claim delivery; (j) granting, acquiring, renouncing, surrendering, transferring or negotiating rights in goods; (k) notifying a person of terms and conditions of a contract of carriage of goods; (l) giving a notice or statement in connection with the performance of a contract of carriage of goods; and (m) acquiring or transferring rights and obligations under a contract of carriage of goods. Comment: This section lists the types of activity that may be affected by the rules in this Part.
25. (1) Subject to subsection (2), a requirement under [enacting jurisdiction] law that an action referred to in any of paragraphs 24(a) to (m) be carried out in writing or by using a paper document is satisfied if the action is carried out by using one or more electronic documents. (2) If a right is to be granted to or an obligation is to be acquired by one person and no other person and a provision of [enacting jurisdiction] law requires that, in order to do so, the right or obligation must be conveyed to that person by the transfer or use of a document in writing, that requirement is satisfied if the right or obligation is conveyed through the use of one or more electronic documents created by a method that gives reliable assurance that the right or obligation has become the right or obligation of that person and no other person. (3) For the purposes of subsection (2), the standard of reliability required shall be assessed in the light of the purpose for which the right or obligation was conveyed and in the light of all the circumstances, including any relevant agreement. (4) If one or more electronic documents are used to accomplish an action referred to in paragraph 24(j) or (m), no document in writing used to effect the action is valid unless the use of electronic documents has been terminated and replaced by the use of documents in writing. A document in writing issued in these circumstances must contain a statement of the termination, and the replacement of the electronic documents by documents in writing does not affect the rights or obligations of the parties involved. (5) If a rule of [enacting jurisdiction] law is compulsorily applicable to a contract of carriage of goods that is set out in, or is evidenced by, a document in writing, that rule shall not be inapplicable to a contract of carriage of goods that is evidenced by one or more electronic documents by reason of the fact that the contract is evidenced by electronic documents instead of by a document in writing. Comment: This section permits the use of electronic documents for the carriage of goods, if the documents comply with this section. Subsection (2) is the electronic functional equivalent of a unique document. If rights are to be given to one particular person, then the electronic document must be in a form that gives reliable assurance that the rights or obligations represented by the document are those of that person and no other. The Act does not say how this might be done. As elsewhere, it provides the legal consequences for doing it.
This is the main source of the principles of the Uniform Act.http://www.un.or.at/uncitral/english/texts/electcom/ml-ec.htm
This is the main American state-level initiative on e-commerce, the product of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. Reports of the meetings of the Drafting Committee and related documents and commentary can be found in the ETAForum.http://www.law.upenn.edu/library/ulc/ulc.htmhttp://www.webcom.com/legaled/ETAForumSingapore
The first country in the world to adopt the UN Model Law was Singapore. http://www.cca.gov.sg/eta/index.html
Australia has published a thorough analysis of how the Model Law could be applied in a common law federal state. It prepared a draft statute for public consultation, and on June 30, 1999, introduced a bill in Parliament.http://www.law.gov.au/ecommerce/
The United Kingdom has been working with similar principles. Its draft legislation was presented in July 1999.http://www.dti.gov.uk/cii/elec/ecbill.pdf
The New Zealand Law Reform Commission reported on the principles of the UN Model Law and their potential application in New Zealand.http://www.lawcom.govt.nz/EComm/R50Con.htm
The federal government introduced legislation to implement the principles of the Model Law to federal legislation in 1998, in Part 2 of Bill C-54, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act.http://www.parl.gc.ca/36/1/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/government/C-54/C-54_2/C-54_cover- E.html
Business Regulation Reform Act, S.O. 1994 c. 32Business Electronic Filing Act, S.N.S. 1995 c.3Electronic Filing of Information Act, S.S.1998 c. E-7.21Business Paper Reduction Act, S.B.C. 1998 c. 26
A number of bodies are trying to advance the law on electronic signatures, usually by giving special status to signatures with particular characteristics. Among them are the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and the European Union. Canada's Bill C-54, noted above, contained provisions about "secure electronic signatures". Next Annual Meeting