Legal framework
Case law & legal basis
Courts and legislators increasingly recognise cryptographic timestamps as valid evidence. Below are the key decisions and legal articles that underpin the value of an Incipite certificate.
TJ Marseille · 1re ch. civ. · RG 23/00046 · 20 March 2025
First French court ruling validating blockchain timestamps in copyright
The Tribunal judiciaire de Marseille held that blockchain timestamps — produced via the "Blockchainyour IP" solution — constitute admissible, legally sufficient evidence to establish the ownership of copyright. The court reasoned that the cryptographic anchor, attested by a court bailiff, forms a reliable chain of prior art proof. This is the first explicit French recognition of blockchain-based timestamps in intellectual property litigation.
eIDAS Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 · Article 41
Qualified electronic timestamps: EU-wide legal presumption
Under eIDAS art. 41, a qualified electronic timestamp enjoys a legal presumption of accuracy of the date and time it indicates and of the integrity of the data to which it relates. This presumption is rebuttable but it shifts the burden of proof to the challenger. The UK Electronic Identification and Trust Services for Electronic Transactions Regulations 2016 (S.I. 2016/696) carried eIDAS into UK law; the substantive equivalence remains in force post-Brexit under the UK Conformity Assessment framework, with UKEI(FTA) Act 2020 s.3 preserving pre-exit EU standards.
Code civil, art. 1366–1367
Electronic writing: the foundational French rule
Art. 1366 Code civil equates electronic writing with handwritten writing when it is produced by a person who can be duly identified and when it is maintained in conditions ensuring its integrity. Art. 1367 further specifies that an electronic signature creates a presumption of the author's identity and consent. An Incipite certificate — with a cryptographic hash anchored on Bitcoin and tied to a verified user account — satisfies both conditions, giving it the same probative weight as any private deed.
Cour de cassation · 22 décembre 2023 (preuve illicitement obtenue)
Evidence admissibility: proportionality over strict exclusion
In a landmark ruling, the Cour de cassation abandoned the principle of automatic exclusion of unlawfully obtained evidence in civil matters, adopting instead a proportionality test: courts must balance the right to proof against the right infringed. For Incipite users, this matters positively: a blockchain timestamp computed client-side from the user's own file raises no question of unlawfulness — it is evidence created by the rightholder themselves. Courts apply the proportionality analysis even more favourably when the evidence is self-generated.
Legal basis articles
Civil Evidence Act 1995 (UK), s. 8
Computer-produced documents
A statement in a document produced by a computer is admissible as evidence of any fact stated in it if the computer was operating properly and the document was produced in the course of normal activities. An Incipite certificate — generated automatically from the hash computation — meets these conditions.
Electronic Communications Act 2000 (UK), s. 7
Electronic signatures and related certificates
Electronic signatures and the certificates supporting them are admissible in evidence in legal proceedings. The cryptographic proof embedded in an Incipite certificate is legally recognised evidence under this provision.
This page is provided for information only and does not constitute legal advice. For advice specific to your situation, consult a qualified intellectual property solicitor.