How to correctly coordinate documents by e-mail so that they serve as evidence if necessary?
Harmonization of the content of the document is an important and responsible stage in any kind of transaction, because the authors of the document are responsible for the content of the document. In addition, from the point of view of responsibility, it is not important for what purpose this document will be used - sent to state institutions or in the resolution of private legal relations. However, there is a difference to which institution or person the document will be addressed - this very factor affects what rules and guidelines will be used for the preparation and coordination of the document.
Coordination of documents with a public figure
The procedure for drafting and execution of documents recognized as legally binding is described in Cabinet of Ministers (MK) regulations No. 558 "Procedure for drafting and execution of documents". This procedure must be followed when preparing documents for coordination in state or local government institutions. Paragraph 6 of Regulation No. 558 of the Council of Ministers states that electronic documents must be subject to the same drafting and design requirements as ordinary written documents, of course, if it is possible to provide this procedure technically.
Clause 30 of MK Regulation No. 558 stipulates that basically a document is approved by signing the document to be approved. Exceptions are cases when a decision is made at a meeting of the organization's collegial body. According to Clause 33 of the regulations, the word "I approve", the official's full job title, its signature and transcript, the date, and in some cases an imprint of the seal must be written on the document that needs to be approved.
Taking into account that the regulations of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 588 state that the approval procedure can also be applied to electronic documents, they can be harmonized, for example, by preparing a separate digital document (for example, a "Word" file), which must contain the details mentioned in Clause 33 of the regulations. It is then signed together with the document to be reconciled in a single file with a secure electronic signature.
In addition, it should be noted that Clauses 79-83 of MK Regulation No. 558 stipulates a special procedure if regulatory acts provide for the coordination of a management document with another organization. In such a case, an approval inscription or a mark on the approval of the document shall be drawn up in the document.
Coordination of documents with private individuals
Although certain points of the Regulation No. 558 of the MK are also applicable to documents of private individuals (in order for them to acquire legal force), the issue of harmonizing documents between private individuals is not always subject to the same strict harmonizing requirements as documents of public persons. The difference is that - in the conclusion of private law contracts, there is freedom to choose the form of the contract, unless special regulatory acts provide for special requirements for a certain type of contract.
It is important to emphasize that a special law has not been developed in Latvia that regulates the procedure for drawing up and coordinating documents between private individuals in the electronic environment, so that they can be used as evidence in case of need, for example in case of disputes in court.
From the practical side, we can look at an example - a document is planned to be coordinated between two or more parties, who must agree on its final version. Each contractor has his own vision of the content of the final version of the contract. Each party usually offers its terms of the content of the contract by sending them to the other party. After that, the second contractor usually adjusts the terms of the contract proposed by the first contractor. If there is communication between the two parties in writing, via e-mail, it is important to track the changes proposed by the parties to the terms of the contract and to understand the nature of all changes. In voluminous documents, this can be a challenge - there is a high chance that some seemingly small but significant change in the content of the contract is overlooked.
In order to avoid a situation where changes to specific clauses of the contract are mutually agreed upon in the e-mail text, but these changes are not reflected in the text of the contract itself, it is important to initially agree on how the changes will be reflected in the text of the draft contract. It is convenient to do this using the change registration function of the relevant platform ("Track Changes" in the case of Word). In addition to tracking changes in the draft contract, you can also use the comparison function, which allows you to compare different versions of the draft document. Also at the moment when the final version of the document is sent, it is recommended to make sure again whether, without notifying the other party, any terms of the contract agreed in advance in the e-mail correspondence have not been amended. Also in such a situation, it is useful to use the comparison function, comparing the final version with the penultimate version of the document .
In the case of large documents, it is recommended to reconcile the disputed points in the text of the email as well, in order to preserve additional evidence of their final version. It is also recommended to compare the relevant disputed points with the final version of the proposed document. After agreeing on the final version of the document, it is recommended to save the document in PDF format before signing to reduce the likelihood of last-minute content changes.
Conflict situations
However, document matching in e-mail does not always go smoothly. In practice, situations often arise in which it is necessary to prove that an agreement was reached on the content of a specific clause of the contract in e-mail correspondence, but the relevant clause has a different content in the signed version of the document. It should be noted that if the document was signed with a secure electronic signature before noticing the differences between the agreement points in the e-mail and the version of the signed document, it may be difficult to prove that the signed version of the document does not correspond to the will of the parties. A document signed with a secure electronic signature (and also by hand) will generally be deemed to be a document that expresses the final will of the parties.
The Civil Procedure Law provides that in case of disputes, the court assesses the relevance and admissibility of the evidence. Also, in accordance with Article 97 of the Law on Civil Procedure, the court evaluates the evidence according to its internal conviction, which is based on evidence that has been comprehensively, completely and objectively verified at the court hearing, guided by legal awareness based on the laws of logic, scientific knowledge and observations gained in life. No evidence has a predetermined force that binds the court. A similar regulation on the evaluation of evidence is also contained in the Law on Administrative Procedure. On the other hand, in criminal proceedings, the issues of proof are regulated differently, determining that the persons involved in the criminal proceedings can use only reliable, relevant and admissible information about the facts as evidence.
Regardless of the type of proceeding, email correspondence between individuals may be used or considered as evidence. When resolving disputes in a court of law, it can be useful, for example, to have evidence that both parties agreed on the content of a specific point of the contract in an e-mail correspondence, but for some reason, possibly due to dishonest actions of one of the parties, the final version of the contract is different from the agreement reached. It should also be borne in mind that in any case the court evaluates the evidence during the trial and gives the final assessment to the evidence presented by the parties.
Finally, Article 1 of the Civil Law stipulates that rights must be exercised and obligations must be performed in good faith. The basic principle of this right should also be remembered when documents are coordinated by e-mail between the contracting parties - compliance with this principle can prevent wasting time and other resources when resolving a dispute in court.