Article 62 of the Saudi Law of Evidence
المادة 62 من نظام الإثبات · الباب الرابع: الدليل الرقمي
If verifying the validity of digital evidence is impossible for a reason not attributable to the parties, the court assesses its force from what appears to it from the circumstances of the case.
Official text (Arabic)
This article has not been amended since the law was issued.
إذا تعذر التحقق من صحة الدليل الرقمي بسبب لا يعود للخصوم، فتقدر المحكمة حجيته بما يظهر لها من ظروف الدعوى.
This is the official Arabic wording, the only legally binding version. We do not translate the law itself; the explanation below is ours. Official source: Bureau of Experts at the Council of Ministers
Article 62 explained in plain English
In some cases, digital evidence may not be capable of examination and verification, not because of a failure by one of the parties, but for a reason beyond their control. This Article sets the rule for this situation.
The Article rests on two points:
- The condition: Verifying the validity of the digital evidence is impossible, and the reason for the impossibility is not attributable to the parties.
- The rule: The evidence is neither excluded automatically nor accepted automatically; rather, the court assesses its force from what appears to it from the circumstances of the case.
This means that the court has discretion in weighing this evidence: it looks at the circumstances of the case and what surrounds the evidence, and then decides how much force to give it in proof.
This situation differs from that of Article 61: there, one of the parties refuses without an acceptable excuse to submit what the court asked for in order to verify, so his right to rely on the evidence is forfeited or it is treated as binding on him. Here, the impossibility is not attributed to any of the parties, so the matter is left to the court's assessment. Article 63 sets out the force of extracts from digital evidence where they match their digital record.
Because the outcome here depends on the court's assessment of the circumstances of each case, a person who has digital evidence that is difficult to verify is advised to consult a lawyer specializing in litigation and evidence.
Practical example
A company in Riyadh submitted emails exchanged with a supplier, and it then emerged that the server on which they were stored had stopped working at the service provider, so the original record could not be examined, through no fault of either party. Here the court assesses the force of those emails according to what appears to it from the circumstances of the case.
Translated from our Arabic explanation with machine assistance. For guidance only; it does not replace advice from a lawyer on your situation.
How we write and review contentA question about Article 62 of Law of Evidence?
Describe what happened and specialist lawyers answer. You can write in English.
- Completely free
- Lawyers from the directory answer
- Your name stays hidden
Civil Litigation & Compensation lawyers: ask a specialist about your case
Describe your situation briefly and we'll suggest a lawyer who specialises in this law
Civil Litigation & Compensation lawyers
Lawyers who handle this kind of case
Dr. Ali Al-Rubaie Law Office and Ittihad Al-Asr Legal Company
Active contributor
Unwan Law Firm
Frequently asked questions about Article 62 of the Saudi Law of Evidence
What happens if digital evidence cannot be verified?
If the reason for the impossibility is not attributable to the parties, the court assesses the force of the evidence from what appears to it from the circumstances of the case.
Is digital evidence rejected automatically if it cannot be verified?
The Article does not provide for automatic rejection; it leaves the assessment of its force to the court where the impossibility is for a reason not attributable to the parties.
What is the difference between Article 61 and Article 62?
Article 61 concerns a party's refusal without excuse, and Article 62 concerns impossibility whose cause is not attributable to the parties.
More articles on Digital Evidence
- Article 10
Any evidence procedure taken electronically is subject to the same provisions set out in the Law of Evidence.
يكون لأي إجراء من إجراءات الإثبات اتخذ إلكترونياً الأحكام المقررة في هذا النظام.
- Article 52
The Article allows the court to accept a paper or digital document issued outside the Kingdom if certified by the competent authorities in the country of issue and in the Kingdom, unless it contravenes public order.
مع عدم الإخلال بالتزامات المملكة بموجب الاتفاقيات الدولية التي تكون طرفاً فيها، يجوز للمحكمة أن تقبل في الإثبات المحرَّر الورقي أو الرقمي الصادر خارج المملكة وا
- Article 53
The Article defines digital evidence as any evidence derived from data created, issued, delivered, stored or communicated by digital means, which can be retrieved in an understandable form.
يعد دليلاً رقمياً كل دليل مستمد من أي بيانات تنشأ أو تصدر أو تسلم أو تحفظ أو تبلغ بوسيلة رقمية، وتكون قابلة للاسترجاع أو الحصول عليها بصورة يمكن فهمها.
- Article 54
The Article lists the forms of digital evidence: the digital record, document and signature, digital correspondence including email, means of communication, digital media, and any other digital evidence.
يشمل الدليل الرقمي الآتي: 1- السجل الرقمي. 2- المحرَّر الرقمي. 3- التوقيع الرقمي. 4- المراسلات الرقمية بما فيها البريد الرقمي. 5- وسائل الاتصال. 6- الوسائط الرق
- Article 55
The Article provides that proof by digital evidence has the same rule as proof by writing set out in the Law of Evidence.
يكون للإثبات بالدليل الرقمي حكم الإثبات بالكتابة الوارد في هذا النظام.
- Article 56
Official digital evidence has the force of an official document if it meets the conditions of paragraph 1 of Article 25, including what is issued automatically by the digital systems of public bodies.
يكون للدليل الرقمي الرسمي الحجية المقررة للمحرَّر الرسمي؛ إذا استوفى الشروط المنصوص عليها في الفقرة (1) من المادة (الخامسة والعشرين) بما في ذلك ما يصدر آلياً من
The texts are reproduced from the official website of the Bureau of Experts at the Council of Ministers for reference; where they differ, the officially published Arabic text prevails. This content is not legal advice.