Electronic Transactions Ordinance, section 17, validity of a contract formed by electronic records

Cap. 553, Electronic Transactions Ordinance, s. 17

In force since 7 Jan 2000.

A contract terms of service (ToS) rule binding public and private bodies.

As of 3 November 2026.

What it requires

Do not assume a contract is void or unenforceable because it was formed through an electronic record: such a contract cannot be denied validity or enforceability on that sole ground, and an offer and its acceptance may be expressed in whole or in part by electronic records unless the parties otherwise agreed (s. 17(1), (2)).
Do not treat an electronic signature attached to or logically associated with an electronic record used in forming a contract as without legal effect on the sole ground that it is an electronic signature (s. 17(2A)).
Section 17 does not apply to the matters listed in section 3, and it does not affect a common-law rule that the offeror may prescribe the method of communicating acceptance (ss. 3, 17(3)).

These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text, as of 3 November 2026.

What this law does

Drafted with AI

Drafted with AI from the cited sources under the direction of UnGovr staff. UnGovr holds editorial responsibility for this page. How this site is made

Research summary

Legal information, not legal advice. This is LexLint's own research summary of a public legal source, and it creates no attorney-client relationship. For decisions that matter, consult qualified counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. About LexLint

Section 17(1) of the Electronic Transactions Ordinance declares that, in the context of the formation of contracts and unless the parties otherwise agree, an offer and the acceptance of an offer may be in whole or in part expressed by means of electronic records.

Under section 17(2), where an electronic record is used in the formation of a contract, the contract is not to be denied validity or enforceability on the sole ground that an electronic record was used for that purpose, and under section 17(2A) an electronic signature attached to or logically associated with such a record is not to be denied legal effect on the sole ground that it is an electronic signature.

Section 17(3) provides that the section does not affect any rule of common law to the effect that the offeror may prescribe the method of communicating acceptance. Section 3 lists matters to which section 17 is not applicable.

When LexLint raises it

When your app profile says your app crawls the web or trains models.

Back to the example · Lint your app