Electronic Signatures – Regulations and Best Practices

By Daniel Levine
Last Updated
Dec 16, 2025
9 min read
Main image - Electronic Signatures – Regulations and Best Practices

Regardless of the industry or the company, business owners and managers often handle and sign a substantial number of documents on a day-to-day basis. These documents may include supplier contracts, employee agreements, financing and banking documents, minute book documents and various correspondences. Given the significant amount of paper involved, the cumbersome and time-consuming task of organizing, executing and delivering documents (whether by courier or via email) inevitably leads to delays, inefficiencies and increased costs. One promising solution addressing these issues is the use of electronic signatures. However, this option is often not adopted or even considered for several reasons ranging from unfamiliarity and inertia to concerns in respect of invalidity and fraud. This article provides an overview of both the legal framework governing electronic signatures and the technology that enables them. Hopefully the information below affords some assurance to business owners, managers and legal professionals that electronic signatures can be a convenient and cost-effective way to transact business.

What is a ‘signature’?

Although the colloquial understanding of a signature (which generally consists of the name of a person written in a distinctive way with his or her own hand) is decidedly narrow, the legal concept of signatures is both broad and flexible. Specifically, the courts have defined a ‘signature’, in as early as 1976, to mean “the writing or otherwise affixing, a person’s name, or a mark to represent his name, by himself, or by his authority, with the intention of authenticating a document as being that of, or as binding on, the person whose name or mark is so written or affixed.” In other words, the key consideration for whether or not a ‘signature’ would be legally effectual is the intent which underlies the ‘signature’ as opposed to the ‘signature’ itself.  Consequently, if a ‘signature’ is found to have the necessary intent (which usually communicates approval of and willingness to be bound by the associated document), then it is likely that the ‘signature’ will be binding.

Electronic Signatures

Based on the common law interpretation of ‘signature’, it is clear that if an electronic signature communicates the necessary intent, it would be found binding in the same way that a traditional hand-written signature would. However, given the concerns surrounding the use of electronic signatures (the most concerning of which is the commonly held perception of a heightened risk of fraud), the Ontario provincial legislature passed the Electronic Commerce Act, 2000 (the “ECA”). (Various e-commerce acts have been passed in the other provinces in Canada and although there are some differences between such acts, they are generally minor.) The ECA sets out the rules for conducting business transactions electronically (in Ontario) and it is a voluntary and enabling statute which enables electronic business transactions while ensuring that parties who do not want to engage in business electronically have the option to refuse to do so. Consequently, before documents with electronic signatures are exchanged and considered binding, all parties involved must have consented to conducting business electronically.

Pursuant to the ECA, ‘electronic signatures’ are defined as “electronic information that a person creates or adopts in order to sign a document and that is in, attached to or associated with the documents.” Further, the ECA provides that an electronic signature can satisfy (barring exceptional circumstances) any legal requirement that a document be signed insofar as the electronic signature is 1) reliable for the purposes of identifying the person, and 2) the association between the electronic signature and the relevant electronic document is reliable. As such, a typed name at the end of an email or the click of an “I accept” or “sign” button on a website or any other electronic platform are often sufficient to create a binding relationship.

Electronic Signature Technology and Audit Trails

The oft-heard argument that electronic signatures are not as “certain” as ink and paper signatures reveals itself to be baseless once one understands how the technology operates. In fact, electronic signatures may rightly be considered the preferred method of authenticating a document. Electronic signature technology uses email as a way of notifying the signator(ies) that specific documents require signatures. Behind every electronic signature is a digital audit trail, a collection of meta data cataloguing all the steps from when a request for an electronic signature is sent out to when the signed document is returned.

Electronic signature technologies generally track the following information as part of the audit:

  • When was a request for an electronic signature sent out;
  • To whom was the request sent out;
  • When was the email opened;
  • When was the document signed and returned;
  • Precise details about the computer or device used to sign the document (type of computer, IP address etc).

The audit trail is safely stored and can be verified in cases where the validity of a signature is questioned. In truth, it is far easier, cheaper and more conclusive to verify an audit trail than to hire experts to verify whether ink squiggles directly correspond to a given individual. Audit trails dramatically increase the technical challenge of faking a signature, and they prevent tampering with documents after they have been signed.  Many electronic signature systems ensure trust in the process by employing a document identification number (“DIN”) or a cryptographic hash, both serving to uniquely provide an independent verifiable trail.

Exceptions and Special Requirements

Certain classes of documents are held to a higher validation standard and in these cases, an electronic signature can only satisfy the legal requirement if the electronic signature meets certain prescribed requirements and information technology standards in addition to the two requirements listed above. Some documents that may require a higher validation standard include, but are not limited to, statutory documents (that are to be submitted to the government), statements made under oath, statements declaring the truth and sealed documents. For any such documents, it is recommended that business owners and managers consult their legal counsel before moving forward with the use of electronic documents and signatures.  It is also important to recognize that, although most electronic signatures are governed by provincial legislation (such as the ECA), there are certain documents which would not fall within jurisdiction of the province and therefore must abide by the federal Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act or other federal legislation in order to be valid and binding.

In addition, although electronic signatures are widely accepted, for public policy reasons, certain documents continue to require a hand-written signature by the signatory in order to be enforceable. In Ontario, these documents include wills and codicils, trusts created by wills or codicils, powers of attorney, and negotiable instruments.

Best Practices

Given the above, the validity of electronic signatures can be broken down into four components: 1) consent, 2) intent, 3) reliable association between the electronic signature and the signatory, and 4) reliable association between the electronic signature and the relevant electronic document. First, as set out in the ECA, for electronic signatures to be valid, that all parties involved in the exchange of electronic documents and signatures must have consented to such. Consequently, it is imperative that all parties keep a written record of the consents before transacting business electronically.

Second, as determined by common law, the means in which an electronic signature is applied must clearly indicate that the signatory is ‘signing’ the electronic document and intends to be bound by it. As such, use of the words ‘sign here’ and a confirmatory statement (such as “By clicking on this button, you are agreeing to be bound by the terms of this electronic document”) which requires the signatory to confirm again (often by clicking ‘yes’) would be useful in ensuring that intent is captured.

Third, there needs to be a reliable association between the signatory and the electronic signature. Often, this association can be evidenced by requesting the electronic signature through a portal that is uniquely linked to the signatory (such as an email address).

Finally, the electronic document and the electronic signature need to be reliably associated. In essence, the electronic signature should be captured such that it clearly applies to each page of the associated document. This association circumvents the concern that any portion of the electronic document was changed or modified after the electronic signature was provided – in which case, the electronic signature would not rightly apply to the pages which were later modified or changed. To satisfy this last requirement, it is best to use an electronic signature software which carries with it an electronic audit trail whereby each document that is signed is issued a DIN.

Conclusion

Electronic signatures are increasingly utilized in every day business and management and provide value to both those collecting signatures as well as the signatories. They provide a solution to the inadvertent inefficiencies and high costs that often come from the tedious and mundane tasks of collecting signatures from different parties. However, it is important that users research the different tools available on the market and choose the one that best services their specific needs. As trust and understanding of the benefits of electronic signatures grow, and their benefits become widespread, disputes over signatures and document tampering may become a relic of the past.

About Loopstra Nixon LLP

Loopstra Nixon is a full-service Canadian business and public law firm dedicated to serving clients involved in business and finance, litigation and dispute resolution, municipal, land use planning and development, and commercial real estate. Major financial institutions, insurance companies, municipal governments, and real estate developers along with corporate organizations and individuals are among the wide range of clients we are proud to serve.

About MinuteBox Inc.

MinuteBox is a cloud-based AI powered tool to support law firms that store and maintain corporate minute books for their clients. It is an online repository where law clerks, lawyers and clients can access and share minute book information safely and securely. Combined with document automation, filing and e-signature features, MinuteBox is quickly becoming the preferred entity management platform for innovative law firms nation-wide.

The foregoing has been prepared for clients of Loopstra Nixon LLP and MinuteBox Inc. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, the information contained herein should not be relied on as legal advice; specific advice should be obtained in each individual case. No responsibility for any loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining from action as a result of material herein is accepted by the authors, Loopstra Nixon LLP or MinuteBox Inc. If advice concerning specific circumstances is required, we would be pleased to be of assistance.

© 2018 Loopstra Nixon LLP and MinuteBox Inc. All rights reserved.

This may qualify as “Attorney Advertising” requiring notice in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

What you should do now

Blog

Related Articles
Discover insights and tips for legal professionals
Oct 17, 2025
3 min read
New requirements for corporate record keeping under Bill C-86 – Amendments to the CBCA

On December 13, 2018, Bill C-86 received Royal Assent, thereby amending certain provisions of the Canada Business Corporations Act (“CBCA”).

The updated provisions include new record keeping requirements for private companies incorporated under the CBCA. As of June 13, 2019. The updates affect those with “significant control” of a company defined as:

Section 2.1(1)

  • (a) an individual who has any of the following interests or rights, or any combination of them, in respect of a significant number of shares of the corporation:
    • (i) the individual is the registered holder of them,
    • (ii) the individual is the beneficial owner of them, or
    • (iii) the individual has direct or indirect control or direction over them;
  • (b) an individual who has any direct or indirect influence that, if exercised, would result in control in fact of the corporation; or
  • (c) an individual to whom prescribed circumstances apply.

A “significant number of shares” is further defined as:

Section 2.1(3)

  • (a) any number of shares that carry 25% or more of the voting rights attached to all of the corporation’s outstanding voting shares; or
  • (b) any number of shares that is equal to 25% or more of all of the corporation’s outstanding shares measured by fair market value.

Summary

Private CBCA corporations must now maintain a register of all individuals who fit the above description, and include in the register the names, birth dates, residence (for tax purposes) and other required data.

Shareholders are now obligated to provide true and accurate information when requested by the corporation.

At least once per financial year, the corporation must review and update this information. Once the corporation is aware of any changes, it has 15 days in order to amend the register accordingly. Failure to properly update the information can result in fines of up to $5,000. However, directors or shareholders knowingly providing false information can result in fines of up to $200,000 and/or six months of imprisonment.

The CBCA requirements ensure that corporations (or the law firms that manage the records for those corporations) must undertake a greater number of tasks each year to ensure the corporate records’ compliance.

The process of updating minute book records will be daunting and tedious, especially if the information is stored in physical minute books binders. Document generation tools and clearly organized cloud-based data and databases can make compliance with the new requirements more manageable.

While the new requirements apply only to privately held CBCA corporations, it is certainly possible that the provincial legislatures will debate and perhaps adopt similar requirements.

At MinuteBox, we have already begun internally testing some new features (to be released in 2019) built specifically to support lawyers and clerks through this process.

Oct 17, 2025
4 min read
What do we do now and what happens next? (Part 1 of 2)

This piece is a list of suggestions and helpful solutions in order to help us, as a legal community, get through the tumultuous times, and ensure we are in the best possible position when this is all over (it will happen… I swear!).

Here we are. The vast majority of lawyers are working from home, trying to find a sense of normalcy in a world that changes by the hour (sometimes less). I always knew the legal industry would undergo a cataclysmic change, but never in my wildest thoughts did I envision a global pandemic would be the catalyst.

Let’s get one thing clear. There is no single-source rule book for how we, as a profession, undertake our role in the current circumstances. These are uncharted waters and we are all navigating them for the first time. Good luck!

But I firmly believe lawyers are smart and resourceful. They will find ways to provide services to clients and ensure the job gets done.

Even at times when we feel helpless as professionals, there are steps lawyers and law firms can take to ensure our industry makes it through this crisis:

Communicate with your clients: Ensure they are well accommodated. A simple phone call goes a long way to build goodwill. In times of uncertainty, “Hi, how are you?” shows concern and empathy. Find out what kind of support they need and offer your services, if you can.

Communicate with other lawyers: One big (normal) fear we may have is that other lawyers are farther along in their management of this crisis than we are. This can lead to uncertainty, anxiety, paranoia and doubt. Rest assured, every lawyer is feeling the stress and everyone is, to at least some degree, underprepared for a situation like this. Speaking with colleagues will not only help settle your thoughts, but may also introduce you to some novel solutions they have uncovered which can help your practice as well.

Explore what doesn’t work: What PAIN POINTS are you specifically feeling now when it comes to your ability to practice? What is not working and what needs fixing. What really grinds your gears when it comes to your practice? These might not be identified immediately, but over the coming weeks, begin to explore which processes are important and which are dead weight.

Take stock of your processes: Do a little process mapping. How were things done before the current health crisis? How are they done now? What can be improved and what was waste? Process mapping for different parts of your practice can help zero-in on areas that can be improved.

Take advantage of government resources: The federal and provincial governments have been providing capital for businesses and individuals. It is important to inform your clients about what’s available, but also determine if you or your firm is eligible. Find out if you are eligible for the Temporary Wage Subsidy (TWS), the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS), the Canada Emergency Business Account (CEBA) and the Canada Emergency Response Benefit program (CERB).

Don’t be afraid to push the envelope when it comes to novel ways to practice: Remember, above all else your duty is to provide service to your clients (in a safe, ethical and secure manner). Think outside the box and be a trailblazer!

Embrace the quiet: Lawyers are notoriously busy, always working on client deadlines (whether actual or self-imposed). Without a doubt, those times will return, guaranteed! But in the meantime, enjoy working fewer hours. Embrace a 9-5 work routine. Take an extended lunch at the kitchen table. Watch an episode of the Price is Right (it’s good for the soul!).

Take the time to be honest with yourself: Anxiety, nervousness and fear are human emotions. And although we sometimes work superhuman hours, we must find time to cope and express our emotions to ourselves and to others.

As lawyers, we are made to feel we have all the answers all the time. It’s alright to take a little bit of time to find the best approach to provide optimal service to your clients and yourself.

If you remember nothing else, remember Rule # 1: Stay healthy. The rest we can figure out together!

Oct 17, 2025
4 min read
The Legal Technology Sales Triangle

Absent double-monitor computers and the ability to send emails on smartphones, in many ways lawyers continue to practise the same way they have for generations. The legal industry has oft been described as the last great mature industry to modernize. However, growing pressures from clients and stiffer competition from new legal service providers are compelling law firms to slowly introduce new processes and technologies in order to internally increase work efficiency and externally create client value.

Legal technology can be divided into two tags: necessary and nuisance.

Necessary technologies, the smaller of the two categories, are tools a modern law firm needs in order to function. Photocopiers, email and the telephone are just three examples.

Alternatively, nuisance focused technologies, where the vast majority of legal technology falls under, provide solutions that are faster, better and cheaper than existing methods and processes. These solutions alleviate real nuisances, but are not required to practise law. For example, AI powered due diligence software “reads” contracts and parses out key information. However, teams of junior associates can perform the very same task, albeit at a slower rate and higher price. Nuisance alleviating technologies are value-added solutions that law firms should strongly consider implementing but are reticent to adopt.

For law firms, the consideration to adopt nuisance alleviating technologies is based on three factors: the simplicity of the technology, the product or service’s ease of use, and how quickly the financial returns are realized. These considerations, taken together, form what we at MinuteBox call the “Legal Technology Sales Triangle.” The degree to which each node is considered and satisfied may help determine whether a law firm will adopt a new nuisance alleviating technology.

Simple

Make sure your nuisance alleviating technology is simple in the eyes of lawyers. While outsiders see an industry inching towards modernization, lawyers feel that they’re on a bullet train moving at top speed. Understanding lawyers’ perspectives is essential when presenting new technologies or innovations to law firms.  Too much change too quickly is risky, and lawyers, as practitioners of risk aversion, will more often than not opt to remain on familiar turf.

So when pitching nuisance alleviating technologies to lawyers ask yourself the following questions:

  1. Is my presentation too technical?
  2. Will lawyers understand what I am trying to do?
  3. Is this a tiny step or radical step in terms of how lawyers and law firms work?

Easy-To-Use

Many lawyers have been practicing the same way for decades and are prone to reverting back to tried and true processes whenever new technologies are introduced. Familiarity with tools and techniques creates a pervasive stickiness. Even though some steps in a legal process may be redundant, lawyers still follow each step. Their individual technique works for them.

Therefore, as a starting point, any new technology must be as easy or easier to use than whatever techniques or solutions the lawyers are currently using. That means if the current process takes five steps, any new solutions must be five steps or fewer. It doesn’t matter how complex the new step; a mouse click, an extra button press, even excessive load times all repel lawyers back to their preferred techniques.

New nuisance alleviating solutions must also be out-of-the box ready. Law firms are busy and are looking for end-to-end solutions that don’t require a lot of onboarding on their part.

The one exception to the easy-to-use requirement is if each additional step yields exponential returns. For every additional button press, mouse click or lag time, the financial return must be high.

Instant Return

The sooner a firm can see financial returns from the adoption of a technology the faster that firm will adopt it. For the vast majority of law firms, strategic decisions are made by the senior leadership, often composed of very senior partners nearing retirement. There is thus a lack of incentive for some decision makers to adopt high cost technologies which only yield returns in the distant future.

While some new technologies can positively impact a firm’s financial position in the long term, the immediate value in the eyes of the decision makers is limited. Instead, senior decision makers will be more inclined to invest in technologies that may be less impactful but have immediate financial returns.

The Legal Technology Sales Triangle is by no means a comprehensive tool when it comes to selling nuisance alleviating technologies to law firms. Yet it adds a sense of perspective for how most firms operate and the considerations they weigh when deciding to adopt impactful technologies.

You're subscribed!
Stay tuned for updates delivered to your inbox.
We couldn’t

process your request
Please double-check your email and try again.
Subscribe
to our newsletter
Stay updated with the latest news and insights from MinuteBox delivered straight to your inbox.