thenbeauthenticated orregistered withsomepublicauthority; whenever arightisincorporated inadocument oftitleornegotiable instrument andthetransfer oftherightisoperated bythetransfer of thedocument oftitleornegotiable instrument; whenever thelegislation isintended toprotect onepartytoa contract whomightotherwise beinaninferior position vis-a-vis the othercontracting party. Thisisforexample thecaseofcertain contracts forthesaleofgoodstoprivate consumers. 20/ (b)Extenttowhichitisanobstacle toEDI 26.Themandatory requirement ofawriting astraditionally understood asa condition tothevalidity ofalegalactis,initspureform,amajor theoretical obstacle totheincreasing useofEDI:aslongastherequirement ismaintained, EDIasameansofconcluding thecontract wouldbeexcluded. 27.Thestudyoflegalsystems inthetwelvememberStatesoftheEECshows that,infact,national rulesontheexchange ofgoodsandservices arenot veryformalistic. Inpractice, theneedtocreatepaperdocuments, ortosign ormanually authenticate paperdocuments forpurposes ofcontract formation, ismoretobeconsidered asanexception thanasthenormalrequirement between tradepartners whowouldbedirectly interested indeveloping EDI relationships. Thisispartly duetotherulesonevidence incommercial litigation asopposed totherulesonevidence innon-commercial litigation (seeparagraphs 32to34below). 28.Exceptforthespecial needsofevidence andtherecordkeeping requirements fortaxorregulatory purposes (seeparagraphs 38to41below), noformalcondition isrequired inEECmemberStatesforconcluding ordrawing mostcommercial contracts, orforsending purchase orders, general conditions ofsale,invoices orthelike. 2.Evidence 29.Asregards thelawofevidence, theTEDISstudybroadly distinguishes between therulesapplied tolitigation incivillawcountries andto litigation incommon lawcountries, andtherulesgoverning theretention of business records fortaxandregulatory purposes. (a)Evidence incivillawcountries 30.TheTEDISstudy21/notesthatthedevelopment ofEDImeetslegal obstacles incivillawcountries duetotheuncertain valueofacopy,since allcomputer records andcomputer printouts arecopiesofanoriginal, whether theoriginal isapaperdocument oranelectronic message. 31.Inthosecaseswhereasignedoriginal isrequired incivillaw countries, therequirement ismadewithaviewtoconstituting evidence acceptable bythecourtsincaseoflitigation, andalsoevidence forA/CN.9/333 English Page10 accounting, taxorotherregulatory purposes. Inbothcases,thewritten evidence mustbestored andkeptavailable duringtheentireperiodoftime whenlitigation canbeinitiated, oruntilsuchtimethepublicauthorities arenolongerentitled tocontest thefactsinquestion. 32.Inthosecountries whereageneral ruleofcivillaw(asdistinguished fromcommercial law)isthateconomic transactions canbeproveninlitigation onlyby awriting, therearemanyexceptions. Forexample, underthelawof thosecountries, awriting isgenerally notrequired fortransactions ofa smallamount. Itisalsothefactthat,whereawritten document thatisnot thecontract itselfcontains somematerial inrelation withthesubstance of thecontract, itcangenerally beadmitted asevidence. Yetanother exception mayexistwhereitisimpossible forapartytoobtainwritten evidence ofthe contract. 22/Itmustbepointed outthatthegeneral requirement ofa writing isconsidered asanevidentiary requirement ofcivillawandnotof commercial law,whereevidence ofcontracts canbepresented toacourtinany form. 33.Theconsequence isthattherequirement ofawriting doesnotaffectEDI asusedformosttrading contracts. Sincethedetermination ofwhichruleon evidence applies depends uponthestatusofthedefendant, theruleofcivil lawapplies when apartywhoisnotamerchant isthedefendant andtherule ofcommercial lawapplies whenthedefendant isamerchant. Inthiscontext, thecharacterization oftheplaintiff asamerchant orasanon-merchant is irrelevant. 34.Evenwhenthecivillawruleapplies, inmanycountries therequirement ofawritten evidence isconsidered nottobemandatory. Itistherefore generally possible fortheparties toagreebeforehand thatcontracts they enterintowillbeevidenced by means otherthanawriting. 35.TheTEDISstudyconcludes that: "Insome member Stateswhich,asdidLuxembourg, passedspecific legislation expressly allowing computer records tobeproduced in litigation, andgivingtosuchrecords thesameevidentiary valueasthat • ofthedocuments theypurport toreproduce, thelawofevidence isno
**Analysis**
The text appears to be discussing the legal framework and regulatory requirements for electronic data interchange (EDI) in the context of international trade. It mentions the need for authentication and evidence in EDI transactions, particularly in the context of civil law countries. The text also highlights the differences in evidence requirements between civil law and common law countries, as well as the need for specific legislation to allow computer records to be used as evidence.

**Category**
International trade, Science and technology