Legal evidence backed by maths

Blockchain evidence in court

Courts worldwide are recognizing blockchain timestamps as valid evidence. Understand the legal framework, landmark rulings, and how Bernstein certificates are built for admissibility.

88
Countries (171 jurisdictions) with UNCITRAL-compatible rules enabling blockchain evidence
27
EU member states where eIDAS-qualified timestamps give blockchain certificates presumption of accuracy
2018
First court ruling explicitly accepting blockchain-anchored evidence as proof of prior existence
3
Independent trust platforms anchoring every Bernstein certificate for maximum legal resilience

What is blockchain evidence?

Blockchain evidence is a cryptographic proof that a specific digital file existed in a specific form at a specific point in time. By anchoring a file's unique fingerprint (hash) to an immutable public ledger, anyone can independently verify that the document has not been altered since certification.

Unlike traditional notarization or copyright registration, blockchain certification is instant, affordable, and globally verifiable. The evidence does not depend on any single institution — it is anchored to decentralized infrastructure that persists independently of any company or government.

For intellectual property disputes, this means you can prove prior art, establish authorship dates, document trade secrets, and demonstrate the evolution of creative work — all with mathematical certainty.

How courts evaluate blockchain evidence

Judges assess blockchain certificates using the same framework applied to any digital evidence, with three key considerations.

1

Authenticity & integrity

Courts verify that the blockchain record has not been tampered with. The cryptographic hash function and distributed consensus mechanism provide mathematical proof of integrity — far stronger than traditional document authentication.

2

Reliability of the system

Judges assess the blockchain platform's track record, governance, and security. Public blockchains like Bitcoin, with over 15 years of unbroken operation and thousands of nodes, satisfy reliability requirements more convincingly than private databases.

3

Link to the dispute

The certificate must be connected to the matter at hand. Bernstein certificates include the file hash, timestamp, and owner identity — establishing a clear chain linking the digital evidence to the party asserting their rights.

Global recognition

Legal recognition by jurisdiction

Blockchain evidence is gaining formal legal status across major economies. Here is the current landscape.

China

In June 2018, the Hangzhou Internet Court became the first court globally to accept blockchain-stored evidence. The Supreme People's Court formalized this in September 2018, authorizing all Internet Courts to accept blockchain-authenticated evidence. Three dedicated judicial blockchain platforms now operate in Hangzhou, Beijing, and Guangzhou.

European Union (eIDAS)

The EU eIDAS Regulation (No. 910/2014) establishes that electronic timestamps cannot be denied legal admissibility solely for being in electronic form. Qualified electronic timestamps enjoy a legal presumption of accuracy across all 27 EU member states. The eIDAS 2.0 update (2024) further integrates blockchain-based electronic ledgers.

United States

Federal Rules of Evidence 902(13) and 902(14), amended in 2017, allow self-authentication of electronic records — aligning with blockchain's cryptographic properties. Vermont (2016), Arizona, Illinois, and Delaware have enacted blockchain-specific legislation. In 2024, the Bitcoin Fog case set precedent for blockchain analytics as admissible evidence.

Italy

Law No. 12/2019 (Article 8-ter) explicitly grants blockchain timestamps the same legal effect as electronic timestamps under eIDAS. Italy was among the first countries to create a comprehensive legal framework for distributed ledger technologies applicable across all sectors.

France

In March 2025, the Tribunal Judiciaire de Marseille recognized blockchain timestamping as valid proof of copyright anteriority in a fashion design dispute — a European first. The court relied on blockchain records over traditional bailiff certification dates.

Germany & UK

German courts have confirmed crypto assets as attachable property rights (Berlin Court of Appeal, 2023). UK's Property (Digital Assets) Bill (2024) establishes digital assets as personal property. Both jurisdictions apply existing electronic evidence frameworks with growing blockchain-specific case law.

Bernstein advantage

Triple-layer evidence anchoring

Bernstein is the only platform that simultaneously anchors your evidence on three independent trust platforms — creating the strongest possible proof.

Bitcoin blockchain

Your file's cryptographic hash is permanently recorded on the Bitcoin blockchain — the most secure, decentralized, and time-tested public ledger in existence. Over 15 years of unbroken operation across thousands of independent nodes worldwide.

EU Qualified Timestamp

Bernstein uses an EU Qualified Trust Service Provider under the eIDAS Regulation. These timestamps carry a legal presumption of accuracy across all 27 EU member states — the highest level of legal recognition for electronic timestamps in Europe.

China Timestamp Authority

A parallel timestamp is issued by a Chinese national timestamping authority, providing additional legal standing in the world's second-largest economy and its specialized Internet Court system.

Landmark court cases

Real rulings where blockchain evidence played a decisive role.

Hangzhou Internet Court (2018)

First court globally to validate blockchain as evidence storage. In a copyright infringement case, the court accepted Bitcoin-timestamped data as valid proof of existence, establishing the precedent that launched judicial blockchain adoption worldwide.

June 2018 — China

Italy Law 12/2019

Italy enacted Article 8-ter, granting blockchain timestamps the same legal effect as electronic timestamps under EU law. One of the first national laws to provide comprehensive legal recognition for distributed ledger technologies.

February 2019 — Italy

United States v. Sterlingov (2024)

The U.S. District Court for D.C. ruled that blockchain analytics (Chainalysis) meet evidentiary reliability standards under the Daubert framework. The court applied forensic evidence standards to blockchain records, strengthening the precedent for blockchain-based proof.

March 2024 — United States

Tribunal de Marseille (2025)

In a fashion design copyright dispute, the court recognized blockchain timestamping as valid proof of anteriority — a European first. The judges relied on blockchain records rather than traditional bailiff certification, signaling a shift toward digital evidence standards.

March 2025 — France

Why Bernstein evidence stands apart

Built specifically for legal admissibility, not just timestamping.

  • Vendor-independent verification — your proof remains valid even if Bernstein disappears
  • Zero-knowledge architecture — files are encrypted client-side; only cryptographic hashes reach the blockchain
  • Triple-platform anchoring across Bitcoin, EU TSA, and China TSA simultaneously
  • Public blockchain with 15+ years of unbroken operation — not a private database
  • Exportable certificates with full cryptographic audit trail for court submission
  • Designed for non-technical judges — certificates include human-readable evidence summaries

Presenting blockchain evidence in court

Practical guidance for attorneys and IP professionals.

1

Prepare clear explanations

Most judges are not blockchain experts. Use analogies: explain hashing as a digital fingerprint and the blockchain as a global, tamper-proof logbook. Bernstein certificates include human-readable summaries designed for this purpose.

2

Use a public, proven blockchain

Courts favor evidence anchored to well-established public blockchains. Bitcoin's 15+ years of unbroken operation and decentralized consensus provide the strongest foundation for reliability arguments.

3

Supplement with corroborating evidence

While blockchain proves existence and integrity, combine it with metadata, witness testimony, or internal records to establish the complete narrative of ownership and creation context.

Start building your evidence today

Create court-ready blockchain certificates in minutes. No legal expertise required.