Electronic Signatures in Law Firms: What Is Legally Valid and When

A client sends back the power of attorney—photographed with a cell phone, signed by hand, and sent as a PDF via email. Is that acceptable? A client wants to sign the fee agreement “simply digitally.” And in an employment law case, the opposing party asks whether the termination agreement can be concluded via a signature platform. Three everyday situations, three different answers—and that’s precisely the problem: “digital signature” is not a uniform term, and the question of which form is sufficient in which situation determines the validity of legal declarations. This article categorizes the three levels of signatures, shows where the electronic form replaces the written form and where paper remains mandatory—and what will change with the EUDI Wallet starting in 2027. It does not replace legal advice in individual cases, but it does provide a reliable working basis for law firm practice.

Three Levels, Three Legal Effects

The eIDAS Regulation (Regulation (EU) No. 910/2014) distinguishes between three levels of electronic signatures. The simple electronic signature is the umbrella term for anything that looks like an electronic “signature”: the typed name at the bottom of an email, the scanned signature in a PDF, or clicking “Accept.” Legally speaking, the validity of such signatures may not be denied solely because they are in electronic form or do not meet the requirements for qualified signatures (Art. 25(1) eIDAS). However, it proves little on its own—if someone disputes having written the email or clicked the button, the other party is required to provide proof.

According to Art. 26 of eIDAS, an advanced electronic signature must be uniquely attributable to a person, enable that person’s identification, be created under that person’s sole control, and make subsequent changes to the document detectable. This is precisely what widely used signature platforms do: They link the signature to email verification or an SMS code, seal the document, and provide an audit trail with timestamps and identification data. In the event of a dispute, this is significantly more valuable than a scanned signature—however, it remains a matter of the court’s assessment of the evidence, not a legal presumption.

Finally, the qualified electronic signature (QES) is the only level that the law equates with a handwritten signature (Art. 25(2) eIDAS). It is based on a qualified certificate issued by a qualified trust service provider—in Germany, under the supervision of the Federal Network Agency—and is mutually recognized throughout the EU. In practice, it is usually generated today via remote signature on a smartphone, following one-time identification via a video identification procedure or the eID function of the national ID card.

The Standard Practice in Client Retentions: Freedom of Form and Written Form

First things first: The vast majority of declarations relevant to law firms are not subject to any specific form requirements. The retainer agreement itself, the power of attorney (unless the law exceptionally provides otherwise, see § 167(2), but also, for example, § 492(4) of the German Civil Code (BGB)) and most business agreements can be concluded via email, orally, or with a click-to-sign. Anyone who insists on paper here is unnecessarily delaying the matter without legal justification.

One step above this is the written form (§ 126b BGB): a legible statement bearing the signatory’s name on a durable medium—email fulfills this requirement. For law firms, the written form is particularly relevant for fee agreements: Section 3a(1) of the German Lawyers’ Fees Act (RVG) requires the written form, a designation as a fee agreement, clear separation from other agreements, and the legally required notice regarding reimbursement of costs. Thus, email is permissible—but only if all substantive requirements are met. Very few fee agreements fail due to the form alone; rather, they fail because of these details.

When the Law Requires Written Form: The Electronic Form

If a law requires written form (§ 126 BGB), § 126a BGB applies: The electronic form may replace the written form—but only with a qualified electronic signature. In the case of contracts, each party must apply a qualified signature to an identical document (§ 126a(2) BGB). An advanced signature via a signature platform is not sufficient here—this is the point that is most frequently misjudged in practice.

Typical examples from day-to-day client work: A fixed-term employment contract must be in writing to be valid (Section 14(4) of the German Part-Time and Fixed-Term Employment Act (TzBfG))—a signed PDF sent by email is not sufficient, but the electronic form with a qualified electronic signature (QES) is. Termination of a lease agreement requires the written form (Section 568(1) of the German Civil Code (BGB)), without excluding the electronic form—here, too, a QES is possible. Consumer loan agreements must be concluded in writing (Section 492(1) of the German Civil Code (BGB)) and can also be concluded using a qualified electronic signature; the form requirement under Section 492(4) BGB applies accordingly to the power of attorney for their conclusion.

Where Only Paper Is Valid: Exceptions

In several instances, the law expressly excludes the electronic form. The most prominent exception is found in labor law: The termination of employment relationships by notice of termination or termination agreement requires the written form; “the electronic form is excluded” (Section 623 of the German Civil Code (BGB)). A termination agreement signed digitally—even with a qualified digital signature—is therefore invalid as to form, a classic example of a costly mistake. The electronic form is also excluded for declarations of suretyship (Section 766 of the German Civil Code (BGB)) and for written employment references (Section 630 of the German Civil Code (BGB), Section 109 of the German Trade Regulation Act (GewO)).

Outside of these cases requiring written form, everything must be handled by a notary anyway: real estate purchase agreements (Section 311b of the German Civil Code (BGB)) and marriage contracts (Section 1410 of the German Civil Code (BGB)) require notarization, while a holographic will (Section 2247 of the German Civil Code (BGB)) must be written entirely by hand. Here, even the QES is no substitute. In practice, this means: The list of exceptions is short, but it concerns high-risk documents. Anyone who does not keep this list in mind risks making declarations that are invalid due to lack of form, with significant liability consequences.

Special Case: Litigation—§ 130a ZPO and the beA

A separate set of rules applies to court proceedings: Preparatory briefs, motions, and statements may be filed as electronic documents under § 130a ZPO—either bearing a qualified electronic signature or signed via a secure transmission channel. In law firm practice, the secure transmission channel is the special electronic attorney mailbox (beA) pursuant to §§ 31a, 31b BRAO: A simple handwritten signature at the bottom of the pleading is sufficient there, because authenticity is guaranteed by the mailbox. Those who work digitally in litigation generally do not need a qualified electronic signature (QES)—but they do need it for cases requiring written form under Section 126a of the German Civil Code (BGB) outside of litigation.

What’s Changing in 2026 and 2027: The EUDI Wallet

Regulation (EU) 2024/1183, the amended eIDAS Regulation, entered into force on May 20, 2024. At its core is the European Digital Identity Wallet (EUDI Wallet): Member States must provide at least one such wallet by the end of 2026; Germany plans to launch the first phase of its government-run wallet in early 2027. Crucial for everyday signing: The wallet must enable natural persons to create qualified electronic signatures by default and free of charge; Member States may restrict free use to non-professional purposes (Art. 5a of the amended eIDAS Regulation).

In other words: Starting in 2027, more and more clients will have a QES on their smartphones—without having to register with a trust service provider, without a signature card, and without a card reader. The currently complex question of how to get clients to adopt the QES will thus become much simpler. It remains to be seen how the German implementation will draw the line between private and professional use and which private providers, in addition to the government-issued wallet, will be certified; a fully developed infrastructure is not expected until sometime in 2027. Unlike banks, insurance companies, or telecommunications providers, law firms are not currently required to accept the wallet. However, those who set up their signature processes properly now will be able to easily adopt the wallet later without any major changes.

A Signature Policy for the Law Firm

The legal framework is straightforward; what many law firms lack is a binding internal policy. Five steps have proven effective.

First: classify your firm’s document types. Which documents are not subject to formal requirements (retainer agreements, power of attorney, business correspondence), what requires text form (fee agreement), what requires written form with the QES option (fixed-term agreements, lease terminations, consumer loans), and what is excluded (notice of termination and termination agreements, guarantees, references)? A one-page matrix that everyone follows prevents individual decisions based on gut instinct.

Second: Establish the standard. For documents not subject to formal requirements but relevant to liability, an advanced signature with an audit trail is worthwhile; for cases requiring written form, only QES is acceptable. The signature platform’s audit trail is part of the file—it serves as proof if the other party disputes the signature.

Third: Carefully select the provider. Where are documents stored, how long do audit trails remain available, and what happens when switching providers? Our checklist for new tools in the law firm provides the criteria for this; the principles from the law firm software comparison also apply to signature tools.

Fourth: Establish client management procedures. Even the best digital workflow is useless if clients don’t know what to expect. A brief standard notice—explaining which documents will be sent digitally, which by mail, and why—significantly reduces follow-up inquiries, as our experience with digital client onboarding shows.

Fifth: Make the list of exceptions visible. The moment someone wants to have a termination notice signed “quickly and digitally” is the moment when having the policy printed out and available at the workplace proves its worth.

Conclusion

The electronic signature has long been the norm in day-to-day law firm operations—but its legal consequences are not always clear. The logic of the law is simple once you’ve sorted it out: freedom of form and written form cover the majority of client matters; the electronic form under Section 126a of the German Civil Code (BGB) replaces the written form only with a qualified signature; and a short list of high-risk documents remains the preserve of paper. With the EUDI Wallet set to launch in 2027, the QES will evolve from a specialized tool into infrastructure—a good time to define your own processes now. Digital law firm platforms such as Jurono can help organize document workflows and approvals more clearly; the legal classification remains the responsibility of the law firm. If you’d like to know what structured digital workflows might look like in your law firm, you can find more information at jurono.eu.