{"id":103465,"date":"2026-09-10T10:39:59","date_gmt":"2026-09-10T09:39:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/?page_id=103465"},"modified":"2026-09-10T10:44:28","modified_gmt":"2026-09-10T09:44:28","slug":"electronic-signature","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/elektronische-handtekening\/","title":{"rendered":"Electronic signature"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In Belgium, electronic signatures are governed by the European eIDAS Regulation (Regulation (EU) No. 910\/2014), supplemented by the Code of Economic Law and the Civil Code. The regulation distinguishes between three types: the standard, the advanced, and the qualified electronic signature. Only the qualified signature is legally equivalent to a handwritten signature. The other two types may not be rejected solely because they are electronic, but the court has discretion to determine whether they identify the signatory and express the signatory\u2019s intent. This page summarizes the rules, case law, and the reasoning to be followed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-yoast-seo-table-of-contents yoast-table-of-contents\"><h2>Table of contents<\/h2><ul><li><a href=\"#h-1-rechtsbronnen-van-de-wet-van-2000-tot-eidas-2\" data-level=\"3\">1. Legal sources: from the 2000 Act to eIDAS 2<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"#h-2-begrippen-wat-een-handtekening-is-en-welke-drie-soorten-eidas-onderscheidt\" data-level=\"3\">2. Definitions: what a signature is and the three types distinguished by eIDAS<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"#h-3-rechtsgevolgen-non-discriminatie-en-gelijkstelling\" data-level=\"3\">3. Legal consequences: non-discrimination and equal treatment<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"#h-4-belgische-aanvullingen-functionele-gelijkwaardigheid-en-verplichte-handtekeningsoorten\" data-level=\"3\">4. Belgian additions: functional equivalence and required signature types<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"#h-5-de-hybride-handtekening-elektronisch-ondertekend-op-papier-afgedrukt\" data-level=\"3\">5. The hybrid signature: electronically signed, printed on paper<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"#h-6-het-stappenplan-bij-een-betwiste-elektronische-handtekening\" data-level=\"3\">6. The step-by-step guide for disputed electronic signatures<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"#h-7-actuele-ontwikkelingen\" data-level=\"3\">7. Current developments<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"#h-verder-lezen-op-ict-rechtswijzer\" data-level=\"3\">Read more on ICT Legal Guide<\/a><\/li><li><a href=\"#h-hoe-onze-advocaten-u-bijstaan\" data-level=\"3\">How our lawyers can assist you<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/div>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-1-rechtsbronnen-van-de-wet-van-2000-tot-eidas-2\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">1. Legal sources: from the 2000 Act to eIDAS 2<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Electronic signatures have existed under Belgian law for more than twenty-five years. The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ejustice.just.fgov.be\/cgi_loi\/article.pl?language=nl&amp;lg_txt=n&amp;numac_search=2000010017&amp;view_numac=2000010017n\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Act of October 20, 2000<\/a> introducing the use of telecommunications and electronic signatures in judicial and extrajudicial proceedings, amended what was then Article 1322 of the former Civil Code. Since then, a set of electronic data that can be attributed to a specific person and guarantees the integrity of the document\u2019s content has been able to serve as a signature. The electronic signature has thus been incorporated into Belgian law through the law of evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A year later, the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ejustice.just.fgov.be\/cgi_loi\/article.pl?language=nl&amp;lg_txt=n&amp;numac_search=2001011298&amp;view_numac=2001011298n\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Act of July 9, 2001<\/a> establishing certain rules regarding the legal framework for electronic signatures and certification services was enacted. That law implemented <a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/NL\/TXT\/?uri=CELEX:31999L0093\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Directive 1999\/93\/EC<\/a> of December 13, 1999, on a common framework for electronic signatures, and granted electronic signatures general legal status, even outside the context of evidence law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Since July 1, 2016, the European regulation has been the cornerstone of the system. The <a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/NL\/TXT\/?uri=CELEX:32014R0910\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">eIDAS regulation<\/a>, formally known as Regulation (EU) No. 910\/2014 of July 23, 2014, on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market, repealed the 1999 directive and is directly applicable in all Member States. Belgium implemented it through the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ejustice.just.fgov.be\/cgi_loi\/article.pl?language=nl&amp;lg_txt=n&amp;numac_search=2016009485&amp;view_numac=2016009485n\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Act of July 21, 2016<\/a> which implements and supplements the regulation, incorporating the rules on trust services into Book XII of the Code of Economic Law (CEL).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The regulation has been substantially amended by <a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/NL\/TXT\/?uri=CELEX:32024R1183\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Regulation (EU) 2024\/1183<\/a> dated April 11, 2024, published on April 30, 2024, and commonly referred to as \u201ceIDAS 2.\u201d This amendment introduces the European digital identity wallet and expands the range of trust services. eIDAS 2 makes few changes to the rules governing electronic signatures themselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Two Belgian statutes supplement the European framework. The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ejustice.just.fgov.be\/cgi_loi\/article.pl?language=nl&amp;lg_txt=n&amp;numac_search=2013A11134&amp;view_numac=2013A11134n\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">CEL<\/a> contains, in Book XII, the rules governing electronic contracts and trust services. The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ejustice.just.fgov.be\/cgi_loi\/article.pl?language=nl&amp;lg_txt=n&amp;numac_search=2019A12168&amp;view_numac=2019A12168n\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Civil Code<\/a> (CC) defines the signature in Book 8 on Evidence and reiterates its functional equivalence in Book 5 on Obligations. In addition, numerous special laws require a qualified electronic signature for specific documents; the most important of these are discussed in Part 4.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-2-begrippen-wat-een-handtekening-is-en-welke-drie-soorten-eidas-onderscheidt\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">2. Definitions: what a signature is and the three types distinguished by eIDAS<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<h4 id=\"h-2-1-de-handtekening-naar-belgisch-recht\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">2.1 The signature under Belgian Law<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The eIDAS Regulation defines what an electronic signature is, but not what a signature is. The latter remains a matter of national law. For Belgium, the answer is found in Article 8.1, 2\u00b0 of the Civil Code: a signature is a mark or a sequence of marks, made by hand, electronically, or by any other means, by which a person identifies themselves and expresses their intent. This definition is technology-neutral and identifies the two functions that every signature must fulfill: identifying the signatory and expressing their consent to the content. Although it is found in the law of evidence, in practice it serves as the general definition applicable to all areas of law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Article 8.1, 3\u00b0 of the Belgian Civil Code does not define the electronic signature on its own, but refers to Article 3, 10\u00b0 through 12\u00b0 of the eIDAS Regulation. Belgian law thus adopts the European three-part classification verbatim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 id=\"h-2-2-de-drie-categorieen-van-de-eidas-verordening\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">2.2 The three categories of the eIDAS Regulation<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Article 3 of the regulation defines three types of electronic signatures. Each subsequent category is a more stringent version of the previous one. The table below compares them side by side.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Category<\/th><th>Definition<\/th><th>Legal Consequence<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Standard electronic signature (Art. 3, 10\u00b0)<\/td><td>Data in electronic form that is attached to or logically associated with other electronic data and that the signatory uses to sign<\/td><td>It may not be rejected simply because it is in electronic form; the judge determines whether it identifies and expresses the intent<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Advanced electronic signature (Art. 3, 11\u00b0 and Art. 26)<\/td><td>Uniquely linked to the signatory, enabling identification; created using means under the signatory's exclusive control; and linked to the data in such a way that any subsequent modification is detectable<\/td><td>Same rule as for a regular signature; some laws accept it as an alternative to a qualified<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Qualified electronic signature (Art. 3, 12\u00b0)<\/td><td>An advanced electronic signature created using a qualified means (Annex II) and based on a qualified certificate issued by a qualified trust service provider (Annex I)<\/td><td>Legally equivalent to a handwritten signature<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The standard electronic signature is the broadest category. This includes a scanned signature on a PDF, a name or initials at the bottom of an email or messaging app, or a scribble made with a finger on a tablet. However, not every digital mark constitutes a signature. On April 12, 2023, the justice of the peace in Zinnik ruled that the inclusion of an IP address on an online contract does not constitute a signature, because it does not identify the person behind the keyboard, and that person is not necessarily the one whose name appears in the contract.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The advanced electronic signature adds technical safeguards that reinforce the functions of identification and consent and also protect the integrity of the document. Many commercial signing platforms provide this level of security.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 id=\"h-2-3-vertrouwensdiensten-en-de-gekwalificeerde-handtekening\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">2.3 Trust services and the qualified signature<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A qualified electronic signature is an advanced signature based on a qualified certificate issued by a qualified trust service provider and created using a qualified means. A trust service is an electronic service provided by a third-party company that guarantees the reliability of the process; the requirements for qualified providers are set forth in Articles 20 through 24 and in Annex I of the Regulation. Only those listed on the national trusted list may call themselves qualified. The European Commission maintains the <a href=\"https:\/\/eidas.ec.europa.eu\/efda\/trust-services\/browse\/eidas\/tls\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">list of qualified providers<\/a> from all member states online.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In the Belgian context, this means that signatures created using the electronic ID card and signatures created via the itsme app are qualified electronic signatures. Anyone signing with a different platform must verify that the platform is on the trusted list and that the signature was created using a qualified certificate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-3-rechtsgevolgen-non-discriminatie-en-gelijkstelling\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">3. Legal consequences: non-discrimination and equal treatment<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Article 25 of the eIDAS Regulation assigns different legal consequences to the three categories. The article sets forth two principles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 id=\"h-3-1-het-non-discriminatiebeginsel-voor-de-gewone-en-de-geavanceerde-handtekening\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">3.1 The principle of non-discrimination for ordinary and advanced signatures<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">According to Article 25(1), the legal effect of an electronic signature and its admissibility as evidence in court may not be denied solely because the signature is electronic or does not meet the requirements for a qualified signature. This is the principle of non-discrimination. It does not prevent a judge from rejecting an electronic procedure as a signature; it merely prohibits the judge from doing so on the basis of the electronic form alone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court of Justice has defined that boundary on two occasions. In the <a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/NL\/TXT\/?uri=CELEX:62021CJ0362\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Ekofrukt<\/a> ruling (ECJ, October 20, 2022, C-362\/21) it concerned a Bulgarian tax assessment that had been signed with a non-qualified signature. The Court of Justice accepted that a national court may declare such a decision null and void, provided that the nullity is not based solely on the fact that the signature was created electronically. In the <a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/NL\/TXT\/?uri=CELEX:62023CJ0302\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Jarocki<\/a> ruling (ECJ, October 17, 2024, C-302\/23) a Polish court refused to accept a pleading that had been filed electronically and signed with a standard electronic signature. The Court of Justice did not find this to constitute discrimination: the refusal was not based on the electronic form of the signature, but on the fact that the court did not have the appropriate IT system through which electronic filing must take place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In practical terms, this means that a standard or advanced electronic signature may always be submitted in Belgian proceedings. Whether it counts as a signature depends on whether it fulfills the two functions set forth in Article 8.1, 2\u00b0 of the Civil Code. If the party invoking it cannot prove who signed it, then the document is not signed, no matter how electronic it may be.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 id=\"h-3-2-het-gelijkstellingsbeginsel-voor-de-gekwalificeerde-handtekening\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">3.2 The principle of equivalence for qualified signatures<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Article 25, paragraph 2, provides that a qualified electronic signature has the same legal effect as a handwritten signature. This is the principle of equivalence. The court may not consider a qualified signature to be of lesser value than a pen-and-paper signature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The principle works both ways. A qualified signature is no less valid than a handwritten signature, but no more so either. The Court of Justice clarified this in its <a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/NL\/TXT\/?uri=CELEX:62022CJ0466\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">V.B. Trade<\/a> ruling (ECJ, February 29, 2024, C-466\/22): The national court must accord a qualified electronic signature the same evidentiary value as a handwritten signature, within the limits imposed by national law on that handwritten signature. If national law permits a handwritten signature to be challenged, it must also permit the same for a qualified electronic signature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This is the case in Belgium. Anyone who disputes a signature may request a handwriting analysis; the procedure is set forth in Articles 883 through 906 of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ejustice.just.fgov.be\/cgi_loi\/article.pl?language=nl&amp;lg_txt=n&amp;numac_search=1967101055&amp;view_numac=1967101055n\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Judicial Code<\/a> (Jud. C.) on handwriting analysis and the claim of forgery. The same course of action is therefore available against a qualified electronic signature, although in that case the analysis would not focus on the handwriting but on the certificate, the creation method, and the question of who had control over it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-4-belgische-aanvullingen-functionele-gelijkwaardigheid-en-verplichte-handtekeningsoorten\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">4. Belgian additions: functional equivalence and required signature types<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<h4 id=\"h-4-1-het-beginsel-van-de-functionele-gelijkwaardigheid\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">4.1 The Principle of functional equivalence<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Article XII.15 of the CEL provides that any statutory or regulatory formal requirement for the formation of contracts by electronic means is satisfied when the functional characteristics of that requirement are preserved. A formal requirement is therefore not defined by a specific procedure, but rather by the functions it fulfills. With regard to signatures, Article XII.15, \u00a7 2 explicitly refers to the eIDAS Regulation: the requirement for a signature is met when the signature complies with Article 3(10) or Article 3(12) of the Regulation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Upon the enactment of Book 5 of the Civil Code, the legislature incorporated the same principle into Article 5.30 of the Civil Code, under the heading \u201cfunctional equivalence.\u201d The text is a copy of Article XII.15 of the CEL, again with a reference to the regulation governing signatures. Article 5.30, \u00a7 3 of the Civil Code does, however, allow the court to disapply the principle to four categories of contracts when practical obstacles exist: contracts concerning real property (except leases), contracts for which the intervention of a court or a public official is required, personal and real security interests provided by consumers, and contracts under family and inheritance law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The flip side of that principle is set forth in Article XII.25, \u00a7 1 of the CEL: unless otherwise provided by law, no one may be required to perform legal acts electronically. Anyone who wishes to use a paper signature may do so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 id=\"h-4-2-wanneer-de-wet-een-gekwalificeerde-handtekening-oplegt\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">4.2 When the law requires a qualified signature<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The principle of non-discrimination does not prohibit Member States from imposing a formal requirement for certain documents. In the Ekofrukt and V.B. Trade rulings, the Court of Justice confirmed that it is up to the Member States to determine whether a document may be drawn up electronically and what type of electronic signature is required for that purpose. The Belgian legislature has regularly made use of that option.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Three examples illustrate this pattern. Article 8.15, paragraph 3, of the Civil Code requires a qualified electronic signature for authentic instruments that a public or ministerial official draws up, executes, or serves in dematerialized form. Article 782, \u00a7 2 of the Judicial Code stipulates that a judgment drawn up in dematerialized form must be signed with a qualified electronic signature. And since October 1, 2024, Article 84, \u00a7 3 of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ejustice.just.fgov.be\/cgi_loi\/article.pl?language=nl&amp;lg_txt=n&amp;numac_search=2014011239&amp;view_numac=2014011239n\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Act of April 4, 2014, on Insurance<\/a> allows the policyholder to cancel his or her policy through the insurer\u2019s digital platform, provided that he or she signs the cancellation notice with a qualified electronic signature or a qualified electronic seal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">That last example illustrates the trade-offs the legislature makes. The original proposal allowed any type of electronic signature. During parliamentary deliberations, the requirement for a qualified signature was imposed because the termination of an insurance contract has serious consequences for the policyholder and, in some cases, for third parties, such as an injured party in a liability insurance claim. The more serious the consequences of the document, the stricter the signature requirement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 id=\"h-4-3-de-geavanceerde-handtekening-als-alternatief\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">4.3 The advanced signature as an alternative<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Less common are provisions that accept an advanced electronic signature as an alternative to a qualified one. Two examples can be found in social security law. Article 23ter, \u00a7 14 of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ejustice.just.fgov.be\/cgi_loi\/article.pl?language=nl&amp;lg_txt=n&amp;numac_search=1967072702&amp;view_numac=1967072702n\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Royal Decree No. 38 of July 27, 1967<\/a> on the social status of self-employed persons and Article 41quater, \u00a7 12 of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.ejustice.just.fgov.be\/cgi_loi\/article.pl?language=nl&amp;lg_txt=n&amp;numac_search=1969062710&amp;view_numac=1969062710n\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Act of June 27, 1969<\/a> amending the Act of December 28, 1944, on social security for workers, allow notices that constitute a garnishment against third parties to bear an advanced or qualified electronic signature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This middle ground may become more important. Recital 63 of eIDAS 2 encourages Member States to promote the use of advanced electronic signatures in everyday transactions for which they provide sufficient security and trust, and asks them, when determining legal effects, to take into account the relationship between the legal value of the document and the cost and security level of the signature. An advanced electronic signature is less expensive and more user-friendly than a qualified one, while still guaranteeing the integrity of the document.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-5-de-hybride-handtekening-elektronisch-ondertekend-op-papier-afgedrukt\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">5. The hybrid signature: electronically signed, printed on paper<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Article XII.25, \u00a7 11 of the CEL provides that the certificate holder\u2019s electronic signature may be materialized in a form that meets the requirements of Article 26 of the eIDAS Regulation. In this context, \u201cmaterialization\u201d means printing on paper. This provision governs the hybrid signature: a signature that is created electronically and then printed on a paper medium.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The rule dates back to the law of February 15, 2012, which amended the law of July 9, 2001. The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.dekamer.be\/FLWB\/PDF\/53\/1450\/53K1450001.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">bill<\/a> that underlay it (Bill to amend the Act of July 9, 2001, establishing certain rules regarding the legal framework for electronic signatures and certification services, Parliamentary Papers, House of Representatives 2010\u20132011, No. 53-1450\/001, 4\u20135) explains what the legislature had in mind. The paper document must\u2014for example, via a scanner, a barcode reader, or a simple reference code on the printout\u2014allow the original digital document with the original electronic signature to be retrieved. The printout is therefore not a copy of a signature, but a key to the electronic original.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In practice, hybrid signatures appear on printed invoices, certificates, and decisions that were created as part of a fully digital process. Anyone who disputes such a document should not challenge the printed copy but should request the digital original and verify the signature on it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-6-het-stappenplan-bij-een-betwiste-elektronische-handtekening\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">6. The step-by-step guide for disputed electronic signatures<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">When a dispute arises as to whether an electronic procedure constitutes a signature, the reasoning follows a three-step process. This sequence is derived from the regulation and the case law of the Court of Justice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 id=\"h-6-1-stap-een-welk-soort-handtekening-schrijft-de-toepasselijke-wet-voor\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">6.1 Step one: what type of signature does the applicable law require?<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The first question is whether the law applicable to the document requires a specific category of electronic signature as a formal requirement. If it requires a qualified signature\u2014as is the case for a dematerialized judgment or an authentic instrument\u2014a lower category is never sufficient. If it accepts an advanced electronic signature as an alternative, then the distinction between advanced and standard signatures matters. If the law is silent\u2014which is the rule for most contracts between businesses and individuals\u2014then any type of electronic signature is permitted, and the discussion revolves solely around its evidentiary value.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">When it comes to contracts, there is a legal nuance regarding evidence. Article 8.8 of the  Civil Code (CC) establishes the principle of free evidence, but Article 8.9 of the CC requires, in principle, a signed document for legal acts involving amounts of 3,500 euros or more, except in transactions between or against businesses. Anyone seeking to prove a contract of that size against a private individual therefore needs a signature within the meaning of Article 8.1, 2\u00b0 of the Civil Code, of whatever kind. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 id=\"h-6-2-stap-twee-is-de-handtekening-gekwalificeerd\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">6.2 Step two: is the signature qualified?<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The second question is how the process used should be classified. That depends on the arguments put forward by the parties. If the signatory or the other party invokes a qualified signature, the three cumulative conditions of Article 3, 12\u00b0 of the eIDAS Regulation must be met: an advanced electronic signature within the meaning of Article 26, created using a qualified means that complies with Annex II, and based on a qualified certificate that complies with Annex I.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In the Ekofrukt ruling, the Court of Justice established the rules governing that test. The absence of a qualified certificate is sufficient to conclude that the signature is not qualified; the name a service provider gives to its signature, such as \u201cprofessional electronic signature,\u201d is irrelevant in this regard. Conversely, the mere mention in the certificate is not sufficient to accept the signature as qualified. If the qualification is legally contested, the national court must verify whether all the conditions of Article 3, 12\u00b0, have been met, including Article 26 and Annex I. In practice, the examination usually focuses on the certificate, as that is the element that can be verified most quickly on the trusted list. However, the scope of the examination depends on the scope of the dispute.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If the signature is qualified, then the document is signed. This applies both when the law required that type of signature and when it permitted any type.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 id=\"h-6-3-stap-drie-vervult-de-niet-gekwalificeerde-handtekening-de-functies-van-een-handtekening\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">6.3 Step three: does the unqualified signature serve the functions of a signature?<\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The third step applies only to procedures that are not qualified, either because the party did not claim otherwise from the outset or because the test in step two yielded a negative result. Provided that the applicable law permits other types, the procedure may still involve a standard or advanced electronic signature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The principle of non-discrimination prohibits the court from dismissing the case on its merits. Before attributing legal consequences to a signature, the court must verify whether it identifies the signatory and expresses his intent. If so, it is a signature and the document is signed. If not, the document is not signed and counts, at most, as prima facie evidence or a factual presumption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In that final step, the distinction between an advanced electronic signature and an ordinary electronic signature is generally irrelevant: both have the same legal effects. The distinction only matters when the law mandates an advanced signature as an alternative to a qualified one, as in the social security provisions in Section 4.3. Anyone who spends a lot of energy in a contractual dispute trying to prove that a DocuSign or Adobe signature is advanced gains nothing by doing so; what matters is that the platform demonstrates who signed and that the document has not been altered since it was signed. These technical safeguards are, however, useful as evidence of the functions of identification and consent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Anyone entering into electronic contracts would therefore be wise to determine in advance what level of formality the document requires and to retain proof of the signature (audit log, certificate, timestamp). <\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-7-actuele-ontwikkelingen\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">7. Current developments<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On June 11, 2025, the Court of Cassation ruled that a judgment may bear both a qualified electronic signature from the presiding judge and the handwritten signatures of the two other judges (<a href=\"https:\/\/juportal.be\/content\/ECLI:BE:CASS:2025:ARR.20250611.2F.2\/NL\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Court of Cassation, June 11, 2025<\/a>, P.25.0445.F). According to the Court of Cassation, no provision prohibits such a mixed signature, so Article 782 of the Judicial Code has not been violated. The decision confirms that the formal requirements governing the signing of judgments serve to identify the judges and confirm their consent, not to prescribe a specific technical method.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">At the European level, the phased implementation of eIDAS 2 is underway. Member States are required to offer a European digital identity wallet, which citizens will use to identify themselves online and provide qualified digital signatures. Furthermore, the amended Article 26(2) of the Regulation mandated the European Commission to assess, no later than May 21, 2026, whether implementing acts establishing reference standards for advanced electronic signatures are necessary. Such standards would confer a presumption of conformity on the advanced signature and facilitate its use as an alternative to the qualified signature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-verder-lezen-op-ict-rechtswijzer\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">Read more on ICT Legal Guide<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/a-judgment-may-be-signed-electronically-as-well-as-by-hand\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">May a judgment be signed electronically as well as by hand?<\/a> Analysis of the Court od Cassation ruling of June 11, 2025, regarding the joint signing of a judgment under Article 782 of the Judicial Code.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/an-electronic-guarantee-by-the-director-of-a-company-is-it-valid\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">An electronic guarantee by the director of a company: is it valid?<\/a> Two court rulings from 2024 regarding the validity and probative value of an electronically signed personal guarantee provided to a bank.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/can-i-make-a-rental-agreement-digitally\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Can I enter into a lease agreement digitally?<\/a> Which steps in a lease agreement can and cannot be handled digitally.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-hoe-onze-advocaten-u-bijstaan\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">How our lawyers can assist you<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">ICT Legal Guide is the knowledge platform of the Intellectual Property, IT Law, AI Law, Data Protection, and Media Law department at Everest Attorneys, led by Joris Deene, Esq. Our lawyers assist companies in selecting the appropriate signature level for their contracts and processes, and defend or challenge the validity of an electronic signature in court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Specifically, we determine which law applies to your document and whether it requires a qualified or advanced signature; we assess whether the platform you use provides the necessary safeguards; we draft the contractual provisions regarding electronic signatures and evidence retention; and, in the event of a dispute, we will conduct a review of the three conditions for a qualified signature or a handwriting analysis of a disputed signature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-buttons is-layout-flex wp-block-buttons-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-button\"><a class=\"wp-block-button__link has-gridlove-acc-background-color has-background wp-element-button\" href=\"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/contact\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Are you unsure whether an electronically signed contract, termination letter, or deed is legally valid, or would you like to know what level of digital signature your company needs for its digital processes? Contact our lawyers specializing in IT law for an initial assessment of your case.<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>De elektronische handtekening is in Belgi\u00eb geregeld door de Europese eIDAS-verordening (Verordening (EU) nr. 910\/2014), aangevuld door het Wetboek van economisch recht en het Burgerlijk Wetboek. De verordening onderscheidt drie soorten: de gewone, de geavanceerde en de gekwalificeerde elektronische handtekening. Alleen de gekwalificeerde handtekening staat van rechtswege gelijk met een handgeschreven handtekening. De twee andere [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":103466,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[197],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-103465","page","type-page","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-eidas"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.0 (Yoast SEO v28.7) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Elektronische handtekening in Belgi\u00eb: de regels | ICT Rechtswijzer<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Gewone, geavanceerde of gekwalificeerde elektronische handtekening: wat geldt in Belgi\u00eb onder eIDAS, het WER en Boek 8 BW, en hoe de rechter een betwiste handtekening toetst.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/electronic-signature\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Elektronische handtekening\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Gewone, geavanceerde of gekwalificeerde elektronische handtekening: wat geldt in Belgi\u00eb onder eIDAS, het WER en Boek 8 BW, en hoe de rechter een betwiste handtekening toetst.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/electronic-signature\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"ICT Rechtswijzer Advocaat\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-09-10T09:44:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/pexels-karola-g2-6336-scaled.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2560\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1707\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"18 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/elektronische-handtekening\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/elektronische-handtekening\\\/\",\"name\":\"Elektronische handtekening in Belgi\u00eb: de regels | ICT Rechtswijzer\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/elektronische-handtekening\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/elektronische-handtekening\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/pexels-karola-g2-6336-scaled.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-10T09:39:59+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-09-10T09:44:28+00:00\",\"description\":\"Gewone, geavanceerde of gekwalificeerde elektronische handtekening: wat geldt in Belgi\u00eb onder eIDAS, het WER en Boek 8 BW, en hoe de rechter een betwiste handtekening toetst.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/elektronische-handtekening\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/elektronische-handtekening\\\/\"]}],\"accessibilityFeature\":[\"tableOfContents\"]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/elektronische-handtekening\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/pexels-karola-g2-6336-scaled.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/pexels-karola-g2-6336-scaled.jpg\",\"width\":2560,\"height\":1707},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/elektronische-handtekening\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Elektronische handtekening\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/\",\"name\":\"ICT Rechtswijzer Advocaat\",\"description\":\"Advocaten in IP, AI, IT, privacy &amp; media\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":[\"Organization\",\"LegalService\"],\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"ICT Rechtswijzer\",\"alternateName\":\"ICT Rechtswijzer, kennisplatform van Everest Advocaten\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/08\\\/joris-deene-auteursrecht-in-een-digitale-omgeving-1-638.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2018\\\/08\\\/joris-deene-auteursrecht-in-een-digitale-omgeving-1-638.jpg\",\"width\":638,\"height\":479,\"caption\":\"ICT Rechtswijzer\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/be.linkedin.com\\\/company\\\/everest-law\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.everest-law.eu\\\/\"],\"description\":\"Kennisplatform van het departement intellectuele eigendom, IT-recht, AI-recht, gegevensbescherming en mediarecht van Everest Advocaten, onder leiding van mr. Joris Deene.\",\"parentOrganization\":{\"@type\":\"LegalService\",\"name\":\"Everest Advocaten\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.everest-law.eu\",\"address\":{\"@type\":\"PostalAddress\",\"streetAddress\":\"Bollebergen 2A bus 20\",\"postalCode\":\"9052\",\"addressLocality\":\"Gent\",\"addressCountry\":\"BE\"}}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Electronic Signatures in Belgium: The Rules | ICT Legal Guide","description":"Standard, advanced, or qualified electronic signatures: what applies in Belgium under eIDAS, the WER, and Book 8 of the Civil Code, and how a court evaluates a disputed signature.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/electronic-signature\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Elektronische handtekening","og_description":"Gewone, geavanceerde of gekwalificeerde elektronische handtekening: wat geldt in Belgi\u00eb onder eIDAS, het WER en Boek 8 BW, en hoe de rechter een betwiste handtekening toetst.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/electronic-signature\/","og_site_name":"ICT Rechtswijzer Advocaat","article_modified_time":"2026-09-10T09:44:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2560,"height":1707,"url":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/pexels-karola-g2-6336-scaled.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"18 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/elektronische-handtekening\/","url":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/elektronische-handtekening\/","name":"Electronic Signatures in Belgium: The Rules | ICT Legal Guide","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/elektronische-handtekening\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/elektronische-handtekening\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/pexels-karola-g2-6336-scaled.jpg","datePublished":"2026-09-10T09:39:59+00:00","dateModified":"2026-09-10T09:44:28+00:00","description":"Standard, advanced, or qualified electronic signatures: what applies in Belgium under eIDAS, the WER, and Book 8 of the Civil Code, and how a court evaluates a disputed signature.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/elektronische-handtekening\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/elektronische-handtekening\/"]}],"accessibilityFeature":["tableOfContents"]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/elektronische-handtekening\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/pexels-karola-g2-6336-scaled.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/pexels-karola-g2-6336-scaled.jpg","width":2560,"height":1707},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/elektronische-handtekening\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Elektronische handtekening"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/","name":"ICT Lawyer","description":"Lawyers in IP, AI, IT, privacy &amp; media","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":["Organization","LegalService"],"@id":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/#organization","name":"ICT Legal Guide","alternateName":"ICT Rechtswijzer, kennisplatform van Everest Advocaten","url":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/joris-deene-auteursrecht-in-een-digitale-omgeving-1-638.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/joris-deene-auteursrecht-in-een-digitale-omgeving-1-638.jpg","width":638,"height":479,"caption":"ICT Rechtswijzer"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/be.linkedin.com\/company\/everest-law","https:\/\/www.everest-law.eu\/"],"description":"Knowledge platform of the Intellectual Property, IT Law, AI Law, Data Protection, and Media Law department at Everest Advocaten, led by Joris Deene, Esq.","parentOrganization":{"@type":"LegalService","name":"Everest Advocaten","url":"https:\/\/www.everest-law.eu","address":{"@type":"PostalAddress","streetAddress":"Bollebergen 2A bus 20","postalCode":"9052","addressLocality":"Gent","addressCountry":"BE"}}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/103465","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=103465"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/103465\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":103471,"href":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/103465\/revisions\/103471"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/103466"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=103465"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=103465"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ictrechtswijzer.be\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=103465"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}