VwGH and fees for electronic signatures in the case of unprinted emails

The Fees Act follows its origins from the paper form and is often seen as no longer being up to date. The question of whether the Fee-based by this means from legal transactions circumvented It can be inferred that no expression of the contract and thus no certificate to be issued has been provided, this has often led to opposing views between the financial administration, the courts, and the taxpayers. After the Universal Flash Storage in his decision the Fee-based in the case of purely electronic legal transactions refuses has (KI 01/2010), preferably the Supreme Administrative Court rather a wide Interpretation of the paper terms (GZ 2009/16/0271 of 16.12.2010).

The Fee-based of a legal transaction knits Basically to the Issuance of a certificate which are agreed upon by the contracting parties signed It must be done. In addition to the handwritten signature, the financial administration requires a Fee policy Of course, that also applies any electronic signature is to be considered a signature under the Fees Act, and then printing the document is not a prerequisite for the creation of the fee debt. Supreme Administrative Court in its decision it basically adheres to this view – thus the Signing by means of safer electronic signature i.s.a. the Signature Act as sufficient to Fee-based to trigger. This also corresponds to the Community law requirements that advanced electronic signatures, based on a qualified certificate and created by a secure signature creation unit, must meet the legal requirements of a handwritten signature and, for example, be admissible as evidence in court proceedings. Print – for example of the emails – It doesn't matter, Because the screen on which the email is displayed is also readable, Paper term I'm further meaning is subject to.

Regarding the question of whether Ordinary electronic signatures, Those that do not meet the requirements of the Signature Act and are used in everyday email traffic can also trigger fees, the VwGH does not take a position taken. If one follows the mere Text of the fee policy (it is stated here that every electronic signature constitutes a signature under the Fees Act), this would be Theoretically possible. However, they correspond mere name designations under an email as well as automatically generated „Disclaimer“ regularly Not den Requirements des Signature law and therefore None present electronic signature (neither a secure nor a simple electronic signature). Consequently, the predominant use of e-mail in practice (with name indication and disclaimer) no fee required from.

Image: © a_korn - Fotolia