As mentioned in previous blogs, eUCP Version 2.0 and eURC Version 1.0 came in to force on 1 July 2019. 


The original aim was to align definitions with those used in local law. However, many legal definitions differ among themselves in formulation if not meaning. As a result, the definitions are modelled on the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Electronic Commerce, which is the most widely imitated in eCommerce legislation. The UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferrable Records and the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Signatures were also used as reference points.


Therefore, in working with the eUCP, it is necessary to consider each applicable legal system with respect to the eUCP definitions to determine:

  • whether local law defers to a system of private rules such as the eUCP where the undertaking is subject to them, and,
  • whether this deference extends to the internal definitions used in the eUCP even if they differ from those used in the definitional section of the law, and,
  • whether there is any substantive conflict between the eUCP definitions and those contained in the local law.


The UNCITRAL definition of ‘automated data processing' was adapted for the eRules. In addition, article 2 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce defines ‘information system' as a system for generating, sending, receiving, storing or otherwise processing data messages. The definition of ‘information system' is intended to cover the entire range of technical means used for transmitting, receiving and storing information.











Back to recent articles