The main features of foreign experience of legal regulation of presentation of (digital) electronic evidence in civil proceedings are considered. The problem of establishing admissibility, relevance and reliability of such evidence is important, since at the moment there are no legislatively established criteria that would allow an objective assessment of electronic evidence on each of the three grounds. The issue of evidence and proof is one of the most important in both theoretical and practical studies of legal science, and the resolution of problems of legal regulation of presentation of electronic evidence is necessary to eliminate gaps in legislation. A study of foreign experience has shown that it is advisable to name some types of electronic evidence in the law (by analogy with written evidence in the Civil Procedure Code), while leaving the list open for the possibility of using any means of proof.
digital evidence, electronic documents, civil procedure, proof, foreign experience
1. Grazhdanskiy processual'nyy kodeks Rossiyskoy Federacii ot 14 noyabrya 2002 g. № 138-FZ (red. ot 01.04.2025) // Sobranie zakonodatel'stva Rossiyskoy Federacii. 2002. № 46. St. 4532. (1. The Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation of November 14, 2002 № 138-FZ (as amended on 01.04.2025) // Collection of legislation of the Russian Federation. 2002. № 46. Art. 4532).
2. Zakon Respubliki Uzbekistan ot 21 noyabrya 2024 g. № ZRU-1003 // URL: https://lex.uz/docs/7228823 (2. Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated November 11, 2024 № ZRU-1003 // URL: https://lex.uz/docs/7228823).
3. Afanas'ev S. F., Baulin O. V., Luk'yanova I. N. i dr. Kurs dokazatel'stvennogo prava : Grazhdanskiy process. Arbitrazhnyy process. Administrativnoe sudoproizvodstvo. M. : Statut, 2019. 656 s. (3. Afanasyev S. F., Baulin O. V., Lukyanova I. N. and others. The course of evidentiary law : Civil procedure. The arbitration process. Administrative proceedings. M. : Statute, 2019. 656 p.).
4. Nekotorye polozheniya Verhovnogo narodnogo suda o dokazatel'stvah v grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve (popravka 2019 g.) // URL: https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-393.html (4. Some provisions of the Supreme People’s Court on Evidence in Civil Proceedings (Amendment 2019) // URL: https://ipc.court.gov.cn/zh-cn/news/view-393.html).
5. Balkibayeva Z. Problem of admissibility and reliability of metadata as evidence // URL: https://doi.org/10.59022/ijlp.232
6. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (USA) Fed. R. Civ. P, § r 34(a)(1)(A). Cornell University Law School, 2010 // URL: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp
7. Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on electronic evidence in civil and administrative proceedings // URL: https://search.coe.int/cm#%7B%22CoEIdentifier%22:[%220900001680902e0c%22],%22sort%22:[%22CoEValidationDate%20Descending%22]%7D
8. Schatz B. L. Digital evidence : representation and assurance : Queensland University of Technology, 2007 // URL: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/16507/
9. Stanfield A. R. The authentication of electronic evidence. – Queensland University of Technology, 2016 // URL: 92 https://eprints.qut.edu.au/93021/1/Allison_Stanfield_Thesis.pdf
10. U.S. Code Chapter 96 – Electronic signatures in global and national commerce // URL: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp
