Electronic signatures vs wet signatures: what the law says

The legal position

Electronic signatures are legally recognised in all major jurisdictions. In the UK, the Law Commission’s 2019 report on electronic execution of documents confirmed that:

1. An electronic signature is capable of satisfying a statutory requirement for a signature
2. An electronic signature is admissible in evidence
3. An electronic signature cannot be denied legal effect solely because it is in electronic form

This applies to Simple Electronic Signatures (SES) — the type produced by tools like Quill — as well as Advanced (AES) and Qualified (QES) Electronic Signatures.

In the US, the ESIGN Act and UETA establish that a signature may not be denied legal effect solely because it is in electronic form. In the EU, the eIDAS Regulation provides the same baseline recognition for electronic signatures across all member states.

When electronic and wet signatures are equivalent

For most commercial contracts, the two are legally equivalent:

• Employment contracts and offer letters
• NDAs and confidentiality agreements
• Service and consulting agreements
• Freelance contracts
• Licence agreements
• Supply and procurement contracts
• Settlement agreements (with appropriate safeguards)

In these cases, the method of signing — ink or electronic — does not affect the validity or enforceability of the contract.

When a wet signature is still required

Each jurisdiction excludes certain document types from electronic signature. These exclusions are narrow and do not affect the typical commercial contracts that Quill is designed for.

In the UK:

• Wills and codicils — the Wills Act 1837 requires the testator’s signature to be witnessed by two people present at the same time
• Deeds for land registration — the Land Registration Act 2002 requires specific execution formalities
• Powers of attorney — must be executed as deeds
• Documents requiring witnessed signatures — Simple Electronic Signatures cannot satisfy witness requirements under current law

In the US, the ESIGN Act excludes wills, family law matters, court orders, and certain UCC documents. In the EU, member states may require Qualified Electronic Signatures for specific categories such as real estate transfers.

The practical difference

The legal difference between electronic and wet signatures is minimal for commercial contracts. The practical difference is significant:

	Wet signature	Electronic signature
Time to complete	Days to weeks (print, sign, post/scan)	Minutes
Location dependent	Yes (need physical document)	No (sign from any device)
Audit trail	None (unless you create one manually)	Automatic (timestamps, IP, consent)
Tamper evidence	None	SHA-256 hash
Storage	Physical filing or manual scanning	Digital, retained for 6 years
Cost per document	Printing, postage, time	£1.99 with Quill

How Quill supports legal validity

Quill produces Simple Electronic Signatures with a comprehensive audit trail:

• Signer name and email address
• Pseudonymised IP address
• Timestamp of each signature event
• Consent acknowledgement (signers must accept before fields activate)
• SHA-256 hash of the completed document for tamper evidence
• Audit certificate page appended to the completed PDF
• Audit data retained for 6 years (Limitation Act 1980)

This audit trail is designed to support the evidential requirements for electronic signatures under applicable law in the UK, EU, and US. If the validity of a signature is ever questioned, the audit trail provides the evidence. Every document costs £1.99 to send, whether it is an NDA, a freelance contract, or an employment contract.