30.3.2021

Electronic Signatures: Can We Finally Stop Sending PDFs?

Many things, from small day-to-day purchases to million-euro transactions, are now just a click or a swipe away. Despite this, contracts are often still signed by hand.

We’re sure everyone has circulated PDFs for signing by email at one time or another. Each signatory prints out the document, signs it, scans it to a new PDF file and sends it to the next signatory by email again. In our experience this approach is very common, for example, with documentation for large financing arrangements.

Is it finally time to consign these PDF circulations to history and move on to fully electronic signatures?

Electronic Signatures Already Mainstream

Sale and purchase agreements and other transaction documents are already commonly signed electronically. In some circles, electronic signatures have become so commonplace that people may forget to make sure in advance that all of the parties involved accept the method.  Even though the parties to a transaction are legally free to agree on matters without traditional hand-written signatures, it is important to make sure the that the procedures and requirements of each party are taken into account.

Using electronic signatures makes it possible to sign hundreds of pages of documentation through a single email link. The signatory is typically emailed a link that they use to send their electronic signature. The process can be designed to require strong identification.

Electronic signatures save time, effort and money, particularly when the parties are not in the same place. The pandemic has increased pressure to adopt electronic signatures, as people have had to avoid face-to-face contact.

Electronic Contracts Assumed Valid

The legal status and legal effect of electronic signatures are based on both EU-level regulation and national legislation.

The EU’s eIDAS Regulation (No 910/2014) provides that the legal effect of electronic signatures should not be denied on the grounds that the signature is electronic. The regulation is directly applicable law in Finland.

The general act concerning contracts in Finland is the Contracts Act (in Finnish, laki varallisuusoikeudellisista oikeustoimista). The Contracts Act provides that a contract does not have to be signed by the parties by hand to be valid, as long as the parties otherwise unanimously commit to the agreement and its contents.

Unless there are statutory formal requirements for a contract, the parties are free to enter into the contract orally, in writing or electronically.

Three Kinds of Electronic Signature

It is worth keeping in mind that there are three levels of electronic signature.

The highest level of verification is provided by a qualified electronic signature, which is legally binding without any further evidence. This highest level of verification is only provided in Finland by the Digital and Population Data Services Agency.

The second highest level of authentication is an electronic signature verified by strong identification. Strong identification systems include, for example, Finnish online banking codes and mobile IDs.

The third and weakest level of authentication is a signature verified by weak identification, which uses, for example, an email address or password.

Security of Electronic Signatures

There are a number of common doubts expressed concerning electronic signatures, for example, that they are unreliable, involve technical uncertainties or might be invalid in a dispute.

To date, we have not come across any situations in which electronic signatures would later have been revealed to have been abused. Using strong identification raises the reliability of electronic signatures well above that of, for example, circulated PDFs. At least the identity of the signatory is authenticated more strongly than the that of the person sending the PDF attachment.

Potential data security risks and attempts at tampering can be mitigated through technological means and additional settings, such as by using numerous auditing chains or identification requirements.

When using the qualified electronic signature method, the signatory cannot deny having made their signature or allege that the document would have been altered later. Unless there are formal requirements for a contract set in law, the parties are free to enter into the contract orally, in writing or electronically. As a rule, an electronic signature is as binding in a dispute as an oral agreement or a hand-written signature.

Based on the eIDAS Regulation, the authentication provided by the Digital and Population Data Services Agency has the same status as a hand-written signature and must be accepted in other EU member states as such.

Is Now the Time?

What about circulating PDFs by email then?

No one will force you to stop, but PDFs are not without risks either—and the risks may be even larger than those of electronic signatures.

With PDFs, the actual identity of the signatory is often not authenticated at all. If the signatory is off in the countryside, for example, how can you be sure that they were actually the one who signed the document?

The idea that circulating scanned PDFs would be a more secure option than electronic signatures is nothing more than a myth based on ingrained habit.

Latest references

We have advised S-Bank Plc in four bond transactions totalling EUR 1.45 billion that provided financing for S-Bank’s acquisition of Svenska Handelsbanken AB’s Finnish private customer, asset management and investment services operations. In 2023, we advised S-Bank in supplementing their earlier bond programme and in the issuance of two new bonds. S-Bank’s first covered bond, valued at EUR 500 million, was issued in September 2023. In addition to general corporate purposes, the purpose of the issue was to finance the acquisition of Svenska Handelsbanken AB’s Finnish private customer, asset management and investment services operations. Further, a EUR 150 million senior preferred MREL eligible bond was issued in November 2023 and the purpose of the issue was to meet the minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) and to finance the bank’s activities. In 2024, we have advised S-Bank Plc in the update of a EUR 3 billion bond programme. Under the programme, S-Bank may issue senior preferred MREL eligible notes, covered bonds and additional tier 1 capital notes. In February of 2024, we advised S-Bank in its issuance of a EUR 300 million senior preferred MREL eligible bond and on the tender offer of its EUR 220 million senior preferred MREL eligible bond maturing in 2025. The tender offer required the prior permission of the Finnish Financial Stability Authority based on Commission Delegated Regulation 2023/827 on technical standards for the reduction of own funds and eligible liabilities prior authorisation. The Stability Authority granted S-Bank a permission for repurchases of the notes. Based on the permission, S-Bank replaced the notes with own funds or eligible liabilities instruments of equal or higher quality at terms that are sustainable for the income capacity of S-Bank. The final tender offer results were announced in February 2024. In April 2024, we further advised S-Bank in supplementing their base prospectus and issue of their second covered bond of EUR 500 million. The covered bond’s maturity date is 16 April 2030.
Case published 30.7.2024
We are acting as the lead counsel to Fortum in a cross-border transaction in which Fortum is selling its recycling and waste business. The business is sold to thematic impact investing firm Summa Equity through its portfolio company NG Group. The debt-free purchase price is approximately EUR 800 million. The transaction is subject to authority approval and customary closing conditions. Fortum’s recycling and waste business to be sold comprises municipal and industrial waste management and end-to-end plastics, metals, ash, slag and hazardous waste treatment and recycling services. These businesses are located in Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway and currently employ approximately 900 employees.
Case published 18.7.2024
We assisted Finnish Climate Fund in junior financing to the shipping company Meriaura for their fleet renewal programme to support the adoption of low-carbon shipping solutions. Meriaura has commissioned two bio-oil-powered hybrid cargo ships with a tonnage of 6,750 from the Royal Bodewes Shipyard in the Netherlands. The ships can achieve emissions reductions of up to 98 % compared to traditional cargo ships powered by fossil fuels. In the emission-intensive freight industry, more efficient vessels powered by renewable fuels have the potential to lead the way to emissions reductions across the sector. Meriaura is a Turku-based maritime shipping company that specialises in the sea transportation of industrial products, raw materials as well as demanding special cargo. The company’s cargo ships operate in Europe, mainly in the Baltic and North Sea. The Finnish Climate Fund is a Finnish state-owned special-assignment company. Its operations focus on combating climate change, boosting low-carbon industry and promoting digitalisation. By the end of December 2023, the Climate Fund has made 24 investment decisions totalling 178.9 million euros.
Case published 26.6.2024
We advised Gasum Oy in a long-term financing arrangement of a total of EUR 565 million with its current lenders. The arrangement includes term loans and revolving credit facilities. It introduced certain sustainability targets, as the margin of the sustainability-linked revolving loan facility is tied to Gasum’s own sustainability goals, which are related to volumes of renewable gas, production of sustainable biogas, and safety. In addition, a part of the term loans is utilised as a green loan to finance Gasum’s strategic investments into increased biogas production both by expanding its production at the existing plants and by constructing new large-scale plants. Nordea acted as coordinator, OP Corporate Bank as sustainability coordinator, and SEB as co-coordinator and agent of the financing arrangement.
Case published 18.6.2024