+ Follow
Photo by Anton: Pexels

Over the past decade, the adoption of digital communication apps, in particular WhatsApp, has made commercial transactions both more informal and instantaneous, and raises compelling inquiries regarding how these forms of communication will be treated in arbitration. Thus, while arbitration has traditionally focused on written agreements, arbitration practices are challenged as they rely on legal and evidentiary means of informal digital agreements. This paper will focus on the progress towards more legal recognition of WhatsApp messages as enforceable contracts and/or admissible digital evidence in proceedings of arbitration. On the one hand, courts and tribunals have become accustomed to the extensive use of WhatsApp as a digital form of communication, with arbitration frameworks and unique legal systems providing inconsistent regulation or authentication of these communications. On the other hand, there have not been formal, consistent legal standards consisting of creating a uniform protocol for contracts traditionally viewed in paper form when entered through WhatsApp. The research method chosen for the purposes of this paper is the doctrinal legal research since the paper will discuss the review of recent Indian and international court and tribunal cases, arbitral rules such as the UNICITRAL Model Law and ICC Arbitration Rules, as well as arbitral examples arising from practice. The article will come to the conclusion that WhatsApp messages can encompass the contractual requisites such as offer, acceptance, and intention, and the fact that courts and tribunals are increasingly willing to acknowledge WhatsApp messages when correctly validated. Nonetheless, a study of WhatsApp from an arbitration and legal perspective considers other factors that are related to the verification of WhatsApp messages, potential tampering, jurisdiction, and privacy. It is therefore clear that moving forward with a fair and reliable digital arbitration process will require consistency on agreed protocols or pathways for authentication from a digital arbitration perspective, digital verification solutions, i.e., blockchain and forensic verification, and procedural reform. As WhatsApp and other digital platforms are no longer seen just as informal networks, they present potential to become trustworthy solutions in the modern resolution of commercial disputes.

The rapid proliferation of digital communication tools has dramatically transformed the way individuals and businesses communicate, negotiate, and conclude deals. WhatsApp has become a prevalent digital communication tool that enables real-time, informal conversations, often culminating in an agreement or understanding between parties. This poses challenges to outcomes that arise from previous arrangements of contracts because traditional written, formal agreements are, and were, the bedrock of efficient, enforceable dispute resolution agreements in arbitration practices. As arbitration practices have continued to shift towards accepting digital evidence in practice, it was determined whether those agreements (and results) communicated across WhatsApp could be valid or enforceable arbitration agreements. This article will examine the legal implications and continuing development of digital evidence and informal digital communications in arbitration. It will focus on how courts and/or arbitral institutions are addressing these WhatsApp agreements and the process of arbitration (as well as the procedural obstacles when accepting that type of evidence for formal dispute resolution). It will propose that modern commercial realities are rapidly transforming an environment where people transact business, often subconsciously, as a handful of examples illustrate. It will reveal that adaptable legislation is needed to ensure fair and efficient dispute resolution processes in arbitration, whilst recognizing that commercial realities continue to change.

Image by ChatGPT

In the technology-driven era, digital evidence, particularly WhatsApp messages, has become increasingly recognized as valid and presumptively binding communication for arbitration. Courts and arbitral tribunals assess these messages using the parties' intent, the terms' clarity, and the obviousness of the past conduct, as opposed to viewing WhatsApp messages as informal non-binding chats. The legal context and meaning of WhatsApp agreements have been formed through the globalization of business, a mobile-first world, the COVID-19 pandemic thrust for remote working, and changes in laws recognizing a similar reality with digital deal-making. WhatsApp agreements have emerged into arbitration for the purposes of admission as evidence through text logs and timestamps, illustrating proof of contract creation with additional context or nuances like emoji use, and providing a framework for dispute resolution through re-creating events and access to credible means to assess credibility. Overall, the adoption of WhatsApp communications in arbitration has transformed the arbitration process in three major ways, increasing efficiency in remote proceedings, reducing physical documentation barriers to access dispute resolution.

Image by chatgpt

International Perspectives

As modes of electronic communication become more common in today’s global economy, international arbitration procedures have begun to embrace technology as evidence of agreements among parties. In the arbitration landscape, however, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) released its new arbitration rules in 2021, and the major recent development of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (UNCITRAL Model Law) is the authorisation of electronic communications when contracting, amongst other procedural provisions. UNCITRAL Model Law was first established in 1985 again at the creation of the arbitral procedure (and then amended again in 2006), to allow for some authors' feedback in changing the procedural guide. The Model Law now states that arbitration agreements executed electronically have the same effect and validity as letters or writing, subject to the satisfaction of the following criteria. First, each arbitration agreement executed in an electronic form must be documented in writing with arbitration efficacy, and/or have some form of written record by which the parties can have regard in the future. Second, parties must provide explicit independent consent to arbitrate disputes under the agreement. The legal recognition of online contractual formation towards arbitration represents a broader international movement reflecting an understanding that the practicalities of consent and agreement are not necessarily dependent on the method of communication employed, whether it be physical agreement formation or electronically mediated terms.

This more modern legal framework allows parties that operate across legal systems to use online messaging platforms to create agreements without nullifying the legal effect of their obligations to arbitrate the matter. A major goal of international arbitration institutions and practitioners towards global arbitration movements is to preserve the expedited resolution process and flexibility that exists in arbitration, as long as global news and business processes operate openly through electronic media.

 Jurisprudential Developments

Judicial forums are also adapting to the dynamics in electronic communication, with courts increasingly relying on WhatsApp messaging and similar abbreviated forms of communication as satisfactory communication evidence of an arbitration agreement. The Delhi High Court in India issued a notable decision confirming that the existence of arbitration agreements under Section 7(4)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, applied to WhatsApp communications and email messages. The Delhi HC found that the “substance and intention” of the WhatsApp message were relevant and therefore the method of communication should not be determinative in establishing the qualification of a valid arbitration agreement.

The case illustrates a willingness on the part of courts to consider informal electronic exchanges with the same weight as a formal written agreement, provided the critical components of an offer, counteroffer, acceptance, and consent were backgrounded through the messages. An order recognizing WhatsApp messaging as capable of establishing a binding arbitration agreement not only confirms the validity of messages as digital evidence, but it expands access to arbitration by enabling parties' flexibility to prove consent in an electronic format.

The ruling may also prompt arbitration practitioners and parties to focus on the evidentiary value of digital records in arbitration (considering the continuing evidence, authenticity of the messages, and contextual relevance). Related, the decision raises security, data control, and the conceptual thinking on agreement and intent about entering in and formalizing electronic mediums in locking the agreement's purpose.

What is digital evidence?

Digital evidence is any data that is stored, transmitted, or received in an electronically stored format that can be used to validate facts as part of a legal dispute. In arbitration, the use of digital evidence has developed from conventional documents to broader forms of electronic data. This spans a wide range of data types, which are now used as digital evidence, including emails, social media interactions, metadata in digital files, audio and video recordings, and specifically messages from instant messaging apps such as WhatsApp. Each has been increasingly critical for establishing the parties’ intentions, communications, and agreements throughout the arbitral process.

I. The modern transition to digital information

The increase in digital evidence use mirrors that of the overall trend in creating and storing information in everyday society, away from paper-based methods. Digital evidence can be significant and, unlike with physical documents, can be created and compiled quickly and with relatively more precision and detail, including timestamps and metadata, permitting verification of timelines and authenticity. However, digital forms of data are agnostic and less physical than paper forms, resulting in the need for greater scrutiny over their integrity, authenticity, and ultimately, their subsequent admissibility in evidence.

Importance of Digital Evidence in Arbitration

Arbitration has traditionally been advantageous for its flexibility, speed, and informal procedural requirements in comparison to litigation. The utilization of digital evidence is naturally suited to arbitration's informal and flexible nature. It permits parties to appropriately submit timely, useful, and often cost-effective evidence without undue delays or costs of acquiring or processing physical documents. In addition, digital evidence can be invaluable in resolving disputes where transactions, negotiations, or communications mostly occur in some electronic form. For example, WhatsApp messages between parties may show evidence of mutuality (consent), terms of the contract, or communications regarding the breach of that contract, material that would not have been available in paper format.

Challenges of Digital Evidence

Despite the benefits of using digital evidence in arbitration, parties and arbiters should also keep in mind some of the challenges that may arise, including:

  • Authentication: Validating that the digital evidence is authentic and without alteration.
  • Tampering Risks: Digital files can be easily modified, creating issues surrounding reliability.
  • Variation by Jurisdiction: Various legal systems and different arbitral processes may be accompanied by differing requirements for not only the admissibility of digital evidence but also the standards for assessing the evidence.
  • Data Privacy and Security: Sensitive digital data will need to be handled using confidentiality and data protection best practices.

These challenges require very high evidentiary standards, a certain level of technical knowledge, and some procedural safeguards to ensure that digital evidence is treated appropriately so that the arbitral process can return substantive findings that are fair and credible.

The Trend of Contracting in a Digital Environment

In the past, contract formation reflected a physical process with a physical document being signed by both parties, all of which served as actual evidence showing that a contract was formed. With the advent of a digital world, parties have developed many different methods of contract creation, which have changed the way in which parties manifest consent:

  • Emails and Scanned Signatures: Confirmations via emails, in the form of confirmed terms with scanned signatures, are now a common and often accepted method of binding agreements.
  • Clickwrap/Browsewrap Websites. User acceptance of terms on a website, either by agreeing with a mouse click or browsing a website, is now commonplace and relies on the use of websites and browsers.

Contracting via Instant Messaging

One of the major advancements in digital contracts has seen the use of messaging apps such as WhatsApp and Telegram to create agreements. Instant messaging is particularly informal and sequences in quick time, but offers as much value to a potential business negotiation, terms agreed, and entire agreement confirmation. These platforms are used by parties so freely in business, they should be seen as a major piece of contractual evidence, and for many parties, WhatsApp conversations may be the only record of their discussions, thus the usefulness in arbitration cases.

Key Legal Questions Regarding Agreements Established Through Messaging

This is a very real issue, given the extent to which businesses are conducting their dealings on these platforms. Therefore, it is crucial to ask the following:

  • Validity: Do WhatsApp messages constitute a binding agreement? If instant messaging does not have the formalities of a contract to form a valid contract, can it meet the requirements of traditional contract formation?
  • Enforceability: Will courts and arbitral tribunals support agreements made on these devices without formal written contracts?
  • Authentication: How can the parties authenticate WhatsApp messages? What must be proven to establish that the messages are genuine, authentic, and attributable to the right sender?

There are a number of important questions for parties and arbiters in aligning arbitration practices with present-day communications and recognizing digital agreements in an appropriate legal context.

Whether WhatsApp messages will be admissible within arbitration will rely primarily on the messages being authenticated and then asking whether they are relevant and whether the integrity of the messages can be maintained. Courts and arbitral tribunals have increasingly accepted electronic communications, including WhatsApp messages, as acceptable pieces of evidence provided that parties are able to satisfy the criteria for use of electronic evidence. The International Bar Association’s Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration (IBA Rules) and the Prague Rules are specifically encouraging the use of electronic evidence and set out detailed recommendations for its use. Generally, the use of electronic evidence must be authenticated, the chain of custody must be preserved, and it must be demonstrated that the electronic evidence has not been undermined during arbitration.

WhatsApp Agreements: Are they legally binding?

Nature of WhatsApp Contracts

WhatsApp messages can demonstrate the necessary elements of a contract:

  • Offer/Acceptance - can identify the offer and acceptance made in chat.
  • Mutual Agreement - the intent of both parties to be bound can be shown from the messaging.
  • Terms of Agreement - can define obligations, timelines, and restrictions.

It is now accepted by a growing number of court decisions around the world that WhatsApp discussions can provide sufficient evidence of the existence of a contract if communications are authentic, clear, and identify a consensus.

WhatsApp Agreements: The new frontier of the agreement concept.

WhatsApp has evolved from just being a texting platform to now being a viable avenue for the conduct of commercial negotiations and the forming of contracts. The tool is used by individuals and businesses when they need faster, multimedia-based, and informal ways of reaching agreements. Nevertheless, there are some difficulties regarding the legal validity of WhatsApp agreements:

  • Authenticity: We must prove the messages are from the parties.
  • Intention: We need to have the intention to make an enforceable contract, based on a series of principles, including contract law.
  • Completeness: WhatsApp chats tend to be very informal, and sometimes fail to communicate the formal language often found in a legal agreement, or the completeness of the terms.
  • Interference (alteration): The risk that discrete parts of messages, edited screenshots, or incomplete evidence are admitted.

Reinventing or recreating arbitral structures for the digital age

Arbitral institutions and their process rules are all in some way incorporating digital evidence, including WhatsApp messages, into arbitrations through a range of different tools and approaches:

  • Authentication Processes: In some matters, therefore, an authentication process will be referenced whereby forensic experts verify the preservation of messages and the continuity of the conversation.
  • Data privacy laws must be complied with: It must be recognized wherever digital evidence is relied upon, and there is also compliance with data protection acts relevant to the evidence to ensure confidentiality over any collected, used, and analysed evidence.
  • Electronic file management and remote hearings: Filing evidence electronically with an ESL manager and hearing the admissions of evidence through remote arbitrations enhances efficiencies and accessibility for arbitration.

Furthermore, parties are increasingly specifying arbitration clauses with reference to, and directly linking to, contemporary digital contracts and communications in their arbitration clause. These specifications specifically address:

  • The very narrow scope of what disputes are arbitrable;
  • The admissibility and dealing with digital evidence; and
  • The procedural and substantive aspects of how WhatsApp agreements are authored, submitted, confirmed, and/or challenged.

Moreover, we also see advances in technology related to things like blockchain timestamping, AI confirming documents, secure online sharing for digital evidence, and even building in trust through transparency in arbitration.

Over the past year already we have started to see precedents in a judicial forum for the admissions of WhatsApp messages as agreements, and as evidence. WhatsApp communications have been accepted by the Supreme Court of India and by various High Courts, and accepted as evidence before several international arbitration tribunals in a number of cases. This is a positive sign that courts and tribunals are willing to use technology in arbitration and litigation, and we expect this trend to continue. Regulatory authorities have suggested that arbitration centres develop standards concerning the use of digital evidence to assist in regulation, equity, and consistency in arbitration.

Challenges and Next Steps

There is no shortage of reasons to be excited about the prospect of moving arbitration online, but challenges remain.

  • Digital Divide: The disparity of access to digital tools and levels of digital literacy may disadvantage one or more disputing parties.
  • Cross-Border Issues: Countries have various data privacy laws and rules for evidence with respect to the use of WhatsApp evidence that represent considerable issues in international arbitrations, including WhatsApp evidence.
  • Security Issues: In instances where sensitive digital information needs to be confidential, the parties need to be confident that it has been secured.

The only way to address these issues is through ongoing collaboration of lawyers, technologists, and regulatory authorities. There is little question that we will have to develop standardized best practices and then train the arbitrators and lawyers on how to use technology and digital evidence and, more importantly, invest in better technology.

Recent Court Decisions

In several cases, Indian courts and international tribunals have determined that WhatsApp communications may constitute binding agreements if:

  • The messages are clear and specific regarding the contract;
  • There is an intention to create legal relations; and
  • There is no doubt regarding who the sender and receiver of the message are, i.e., they are verifiable.

The Delhi High Court and several respective commercial arbitration tribunals have admitted WhatsApp chats as admissible and enforceable evidence in disputes.

New Methods of Development and Collaboration

What we have seen is that arbitration has been a very document and paper-heavy process. Digitalization has claimed some notable gains in innovation as follows:

  • Online hearings and virtual meetings
  • Submitting digital evidence
  • Using electronic discovery and analysis

WhatsApp messages have supported and enhanced the dynamic nature of arbitration, as immediate/real-time evidence of negotiations and understandings made during arbitration is delivered 'on demand'.

Advantages

  • Speed and Efficiency – Digital evidence solves the problems of speed and efficiency by placing relevant information instantly in front of decision-makers.
  • Cost-Effective – By reducing reliance on hard copies and limiting witnesses, litigation costs are often reduced.
  • Transparency – By removing the interpretations and ambiguity of face-to-face meetings, real-time conversations strengthen the meanings of spontaneity and clarity.

Challenges to Use Digital Communications in Arbitration

Informality and Ambiguity

The informal nature of WhatsApp messages and the often brevity of exchanges make it difficult to define the clarity and significance found in traditional contracts. Digital communication may introduce uncertainty into disputes concerning the parties’ true intent and the particulars of the agreed-upon terms.

Authentication and Verification

Authenticating digital communications is a challenge for arbitration cases. As messages can be altered and invented, verification requires technical evidence like metadata, digital signatures, and potential forensic sources in order to provide evidence that can be relied upon within the arbitration process.

 Jurisdictions and Procedures

Jurisdictional differences concerning the admissibility of digital evidence lead to more inconsistency in acceptance and enforcement than in traditional systems, especially in international arbitration, where parties are part of different justice systems.

Other challenges

  • Privacy and Confidentiality – Remaining vigilant about sensitive information will involve protocols and safeguards.
  • Robust Technology Knowledge – Arbitrators and counsel require, or should have, the technical knowledge to work effectively with digital evidence.

Best Practices for Using WhatsApp Agreements in Arbitration

  • Keep Records: Screenshots, backups, and exports of chats are always helpful for evidence.
  • Identities: Use phone numbers, social media accounts, or other evidence that establishes the identities of the parties.
  • Clear Terms: Every effort or attempt should be made to communicate the terms of a contract within the messages passed between parties.
  • Digital Communications Consent: This should be clearly established in negotiations when parties are agreeing to use WhatsApp for their contractual negotiations.
  • Protect Data: This should include every effort to encrypt and securely store evidence.

The Future of Tech-Enabled Arbitration Models

The incorporation of technology and arbitration creates new models:

  • Smart Contracts on blockchain – Automatically execute contracts when specified criteria are met.
  • AI evidence verification and analysis – Using tools that can filter and analyze digital evidence.
  • Virtual arbitration platforms – Hosts all parts of the arbitration process in an online environment.

Delhi High Court: WhatsApp and Emails may suffice as a valid Arbitration Agreement

Belvedere Resources DMCC v. OCL Iron & Steel Ltd. was released in July 2025. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi addressed a substantive issue relating to digital communications and arbitration. The issue for the court was whether a series of correspondence of texts on WhatsApp, and emails between parties - absent a contract signed in writing - can be construed to represent a legal arbitration agreement. The court found that they could, and confirmed that informal communications made digitally were permissible under arbitration agreements, through Indian law.

This ruling arose out of Section 7(4)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which expressly states that a written arbitration agreement is by no means limited to the traditional manner of written document under law, but can take many more forms, and can include letters, telex, telegram or any other form of telecommunication that provides a record of parties intention to have an arbitration agreement that is governed by the alternative dispute resolution process. The court noted that "other means" can include WhatsApp and emails that identify the parties' intention to have disputes referred to arbitration. The ruling is significant as it embodies a rebirth of informal communications that already exist and now predominate, as businesses transact at a rapid pace in the digital age through mobile applications or via email, rather than through formally drafted written contracts.

This ruling enables the Delhi High Court to align the Indian jurisprudence towards international arbitration, and it represents a positive acknowledgment that, in India, now, the courts are willing to recognize and uphold tolerance of the digitally recorded mutual intention of parties to submit to arbitration, as an efficient alternative to utilising a signed paper-written agreement to resolve disputes.

Madhya Pradesh High Court: WhatsApp Chats may be admissible Evidence in Divorce Proceedings

In a separate and equally significant decision, the Madhya Pradesh High Court on June 16, 2025, handled the use of WhatsApp messages in the area of family law - divorce. In this case, one spouse provided WhatsApp conversations as evidence of the alleged extramarital affair by the other spouse. The opposing party claimed the conversations were inadmissible because they were against consent, thus offensive to the right to privacy.

The court ruled that the overriding principle for a fair trial in circumstances like these would be to ultimately allow for a fair trial rather than expressly determining the issue of privacy. The court leaned on Family Courts being a more permissive evidentiary framework, and that the Family Court Act,1984, prescribed what the Family Court can consider; and specifically invoked Section 14 of the Family Court Act to note it is for the Family Court to determine what it sees as relevant, even if it would contravene admissions under the Indian Evidence Act. Accordingly, the WhatsApp messages were admissible evidence.

This has important repercussions, demonstrating that electronic messages, regardless of the documentation or fact of their informal sharing, can become imperative to the determination of personal matters like divorce, custody disputes, and property settlements. But it also helps create a new line of balancing how private matters like personal ones in divorce, custody disputes, and property settlements, can arise against a party's right to privacy, and more importantly, let the Court assess whether the evidence in issue is important to furthering that party's understanding of the conduct at hand. The Court signals to litigants that if the WhatsApp chats are authentic, relevant, and capable of being relied upon, then they may serve the Court in favour of truth, especially in sensitive matters.

Emails and Metadata in Arbitrating Disputes

In the case of one dispute between two companies, the key issue was whether the parties had agreed to an added fee for expedited service. The claimant argued that the parties agreed to the added fee in the course of their email chain, while the respondent argued that it did not consent to the added fee. The claimant not only provided the email chain for the arbitral tribunal but also the metadata associated with the emails—the date stamp, accessible IP address, and whether the email had been opened. Of note, the respondent had replied “Confirmed” to one of the emails, which was an important element in establishing acceptance of the added fee. The arbitral tribunal reviewed the content and metadata and determined that an agreement was established regarding the added fee. The case also showed how email metadata can provide objective, date-stamped proof in cases where the terms of a contract are disputed.

Cloud File Logs in Intellectual Property Disputes

In the case of alleged theft of intellectual property, a startup accused a former employee of downloading confidential source code in the course of resigning from the company and uploading it to their own cloud account. The startup produced digital logs from its internal cloud system showing the employee had accessed certain folders containing critical code, and records showing download activity immediately before the resignation. Because the records were automatically generated and stamped with date and time, the logs provided compelling digital evidence that the former employee accessed the materials without authorization. This example illustrates how system-generated logs and access records can help effectively demonstrate an instance of digital misconduct in arbitration.

WhatsApp Business Deal Treated as a Contract

In another case, the vendor and retailer are negotiating the sale of a product via WhatsApp. The exchange breaks down the terms nicely, including the unit price, delivery date, and a confirmation of mutual assent with: "Deal confirmed. Deliver by Friday." Although no written contract was signed (or any contract for that matter), the retailer received the goods but did not make payment. The vendor commenced arbitration and submitted the whole WhatsApp conversation. The tribunal decided that the WhatsApp exchange was proof of all of the basic elements of a contract: offer, acceptance, consideration, and intent to create legal relations. This ruling reaffirmed that binding agreements can be made over informal digital platforms, provided that the communication acknowledges mutual assent.

Modifying a Contract via WhatsApp

In this example, we have two construction companies that already have a signed contract, but the construction companies agreed to change the project timeline due to weather conditions. The change was made entirely by WhatsApp. The respondent later denied changing the contract, but the claimant had the WhatsApp chat that included the respondent stating a new deadline: "Let's push the finish date to July 15, based on the rain," and the claimant responded in the affirmative. The tribunal concluded it was a valid variation to the contract, since both parties showed written agreement (albeit in an informal way). The decision highlights that WhatsApp's written variations can have some legal weight, provided both parties were clear about the changes and agreed in writing.

Authentication of WhatsApp Messages

In a shareholder dispute, one shareholder put forth WhatsApp chats to demonstrate the abusive conduct of the other shareholder, who subsequently disputed the authenticity of the texts based on tampering. The arbitral tribunal indicated that the party tendering the WhatsApp chats had to produce forensic evidence in the form of a backup of the device, the screenshots of the chats, a review of the metadata of the messages, and an expert report on digital forensics. The digital forensics expert confirmed that the WhatsApp chats were original messages, appropriately timestamped, sent from the respondent's verified WhatsApp number, and there was no indication of tampering. The tribunal admitted the recorded statements based on the authentication, at which time the tribunal relied on the WhatsApp messages to a large degree in their decision. This example shows the important role of technical analysis of digital evidence in disputes when there are challenges made to the authenticity of the messages.

Jurisdictional Conundrum in Cross-Border Dispute Resolution

This example involves an Indian corporation and a German client, where negotiations began on WhatsApp and escalated into a dispute. The Indian party subsequently commenced an arbitration in India. The German corporation argued that the arbitration should not proceed as recommended by Indian law, instead claiming that the WhatsApp messages would be tested for admissibility by German law. The tribunal had a jurisdictional choice of law problem and assessed the agreement of both parties, including the express and implied law as contemplated in the agreement. The tribunal also looked at whether or not the WhatsApp messages would be admissible under the rules of arbitration, procedures, and standards and practices as accepted in both jurisdictions, notwithstanding the propriety of cases. Recognizing that the WhatsApp messages should be relevant, properly authenticated, and admissible evidence regarding both jurisdictions, the arbitral tribunal accepted them. However, as noted, there is a complexity with reference to the similarities in the law covering cross-jurisdictional, cross-border arbitration when the jurisdictions involved may have competing practices in the proposed treatment of digitally formatted evidence.

Data Privacy Issues of Evidence Pull-out of WhatsApp

In a shareholder dispute, a lot of sensitive financial statements and particulars were exchanged through WhatsApp. During the arbitration, one party produced the WhatsApp text messages as evidence. When proceeding with the examination of the text messages, the tribunal took a break in its decision because of privacy and confidentiality issues raised by the evidence. In particular, the tribunal wanted to explore if there was a prior understanding directly relevant to using WhatsApp to communicate with one another in addressing sensitive data, if the messages themselves had encryption and that the evidence was preserved by the parties (preserved by the dates in the messages), or whether the parties could understand the proof to be violating privacy rights having regard to issues such as GDPR. After the party produced the evidence produced it, it satisfied the tribunal that all messages exchanged were end-to-end encrypted with both parties providing agreement to share the confidential and commercially relevant material in discussion, and that the data itself was preserved with a significant measure of security. In the end, the tribunal indicated satisfaction that all privacy and legal obligations had been satisfied, having regard to the evidence. This example demonstrates that, as a general principle of evidence, compliance with the rules of data protection represents an important aspect of private digital materials or information being submitted to arbitration.

Standardisation of Digital Communications Protocols

The introduction of uniform digital communications protocols can assist in improving reliability and legitimacy. Protocols should include requirements for authentication, storage, and retrieval, for evidentiary purposes.

Use of Blockchain Technology

The immutable nature of the timestamp and recordkeeping aspect of blockchain technology may lessen concerns that messages may be altered. Timestamps and records of digital communications are provided in this secure manner and add evidentiary value to WhatsApp messages during arbitration proceedings.

Training and Awareness Programs

It would be important to have training programs for legal practitioners, arbitrators, and parties regarding the specifics of digital communications. Training programs can provide participants with valuable experience on how to employ digital evidence with a view to achieving fair results and decisions.

The use of digital communications—especially WhatsApp—in arbitration is a major and paradigm-quality development in dispute resolution, and reflects a shift towards digital technology in legal processes, and witnesses a new level of reconciliation with the reality of how we conduct commercial activity today. Nevertheless, there are many implications for PRDs that peak at important challenges that need to be taken into account. Authentication of communication, privacy rights, and areas of jurisdiction are some of the risks that could result in arbitration failing to be fair and dependable if lawyers do not pay attention to them. Nevertheless, there are noteworthy advantages to taking an approach which accepts documents and communications issued/or sent via a digital technology such as WhatsApp: improved communication, time efficiency, procedural efficiency, greater access to justice for parties who would be impeded by geographical access to justice, transparent process, and other improvements which lead to a smoother, cheaper, and more accessible dispute resolution process. In order to take advantage of digital communications and other forms of science and technology, it is important that the arbitral community has a planned and holistic response to the opportunity. That is, we need to develop and create standardized protocols and best practices on the collection, authentication, preservation, and presentation of such communications. Utilizing measures and protocols of technology, as an example, blockchain technology can enforce the integrity and permanence of digital communications and documents, thus reducing manipulation and enhancing the evidential value of both. Educating arbitrators, legal practitioners, and parties on how to use digital communications for their best advantage requires full training and education programs in order that parties understand how to use the meaning of the technology on which conclusions are based. Investing in the technology and providing parties with tools that AAs must understand fosters confidence and could move them toward achieving justice. Ultimately, the development of arbitration reflects a bridging of the time-honoured traditions of legal justice and the consequences of important emerging technologies. At one time, WhatsApp was just another informal way of having conversations, but today, the technology is inherent in forming a binding agreement and a method for resolving disputes. Arbitration will more confidently become an effective process to deliver appropriate, fair, and timely decisions that meet expectations of expediency and younger and more digitally-connected populations.

.    .    .

Cases

  • Belvedere Resources DMCC v. OCL Iron & Steel Ltd., 2025 DHC 5128 (Del. HC July 22, 2025).
  • Jaevee Homes Ltd v. Fincham (t/a Fincham Demolition) [2025] EWHC 942 (TCC).
  • Madhya Pradesh High Court: WhatsApp Chats May Be
    Admissible Evidence in Divorce Proceedings, Bar & Bench (Mar. 15, 2023).

Statutes & Rules

  • Arbitration and Conciliation Act, No. 26 of 1996, § 7(4)(b), India Code (1996).
  • Information Technology Act, No. 21 of 2000, §§ 4–5, India Code (2000).
  • Ohio Rev. Code § 1306.06(A)–(D).
  • La. Rev. Stat. § 9:2607(A)–(D).
  • International Bar Association, IBA Rules on the Taking of
    Evidence in International Arbitration, arts. 9–10 (effective 2020).
  • International Chamber of Commerce, ICC Arbitration Rules (2021).
  • UNCITRAL, Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, art. 7 (amended 2006).

International Instruments

  • U.N. Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracts, Dec. 19, 2005, 2898 U.N.T.S. 3.
  • UNCITRAL, Notes on Organizing Arbitral Proceedings 24–26 (2021).

Books

  • Gary B. Born, International Commercial Arbitration 2781 (3d ed. 2021).
  • Stephen Mason & Daniel Seng, Electronic Evidence 1–3 (5th ed. 2021).

Journal Articles

  • Nadarajah Govindasamy, Challenges and Opportunities in
    Online Arbitration: Addressing the Digital Divide and Security Issues, 37 Arb. Int’l 267, 270–72 (2021).
  • Alice Yu, Best Practices for Digital Evidence in Arbitration: Maintaining Integrity and Privacy, 29 Arb. Int’l 303, 310–13
    (2022).
  • Nathan R. Goodman, The Challenges of Digital Evidence in International Arbitration, 25 Am. Rev. Int’l Arb. 34, 39–42 (2023).
  • Céline Vanini et al., Strategies and Challenges of Timestamp Tampering for Improved Digital Forensic Event Reconstruction (Extended Version) (Dec. 30, 2024).

Online News & Reports

  • From Conversation to Contract: Legal Recognition of WhatsApp and Email-Based Arbitration Agreements, Bar & Bench (July 23, 2025), https://www.barandbench.com/view-point/from-conversation-to-contract-legal-recognition-of-whatsapp-and-email-based-arbitration-agreements.
  • Verdictum, Belvedere Resources DMCC v. OCL Iron & Steel Ltd. (July 22, 2025), https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/high-courts/delhi-high-court/belvedere-resources-dmcc-v-ocl-iron-
    and-steel-ltd-2025-dhc-5128-arbitration-agreement-whatsapp-email-1583394.
  • Lawchakra, WhatsApp Arbitration: Delhi High Court Ruling (July 2025), https://lawchakra.in/high-court/whatsapp-arbitration-delhi-high-court/.
  • Lawbeat, WhatsApp and Email Exchanges Can Constitute Valid Arbitration Agreement: Delhi HC (July 22, 2025), https://lawbeat.in/news-updates/whatsapp-and-email-exchanges-can-constitute-valid-arbitration-agreement-delhi-hc-rules.
  • Notice Sent via WhatsApp Valid, Rules Bombay High Court,
    Times of India (June 17, 2018), https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/notice-sent-via-whatsapp-valid-rules-bombay-high-court/articleshow/64608690.cms.
  • RMLNLU L. Rev., Online Arbitration in India (July 31, 2015), https://rmlnlulawreview.com/2015/07/31/online-arbritation-in-india/.
  • The Hindu, Delhi High Court Recognizes WhatsApp Messages as Binding Evidence (Dec. 12, 2024), https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/delhi-high-court-whatsapp-messages-bind-contract/article66874094.ece.
  • Lawbeat, Digital Evidence Examples in Arbitration, https://lawbeat.in/news-updates/examples-of-digital-evidence-
    in-arbitration.

Practitioner & Law Firm Insights

Technical & Forensic Reports

Discus