Legal Validity of Blockchain Evidence: E-Evidence Admissibility Standards and Judicial Acceptance Pathways

Whether product traceability data can serve as effective evidence in court during quality disputes depends on whether it satisfies the three requirements for electronic evidence — authenticity, legality, and relevance. The value of blockchain notarization technology lies precisely in its ability to significantly strengthen the authenticity determination of electronic evidence.

China's Judicial Policy Framework for Blockchain Evidence. The 2018 "Supreme People's Court Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Trial of Cases by Internet Courts" first explicitly stated that "electronic data collected and preserved through blockchain and other technologies may be used as evidence where its authenticity can be demonstrated." The 2021 "Online Litigation Rules of People's Courts" further refined the examination standards for blockchain-preserved evidence: courts shall examine the qualifications and credibility of the preservation platform, the compliance of the preservation technology pathway, the verifiability of the preservation process, and data integrity. In 2023, the Supreme People's Court issued the "Guiding Opinions on Strengthening Blockchain Judicial Applications," promoting the establishment of a unified national blockchain electronic evidence platform across courts. These policies establish the legal standing of blockchain evidence in the judicial system.

The Value of Blockchain in the Three-Pronged E-Evidence Test. Authenticity — this is blockchain evidence's most core contribution. Traditional electronic data (database records, log files) can be easily tampered with and difficult to audit after the fact, whereas blockchain's timestamps and hash chains provide mathematically verifiable immutability. When courts examine the authenticity of preserved data, they primarily check: whether on-chain timestamps are continuous and reasonable, whether hash values are consistent, and whether the preservation platform has the capability to ensure data was not tampered with before going on-chain (source trustworthiness). Legality — the legality of the preservation process requires the preservation act to comply with statutory procedures, including: the preserving party has legal access and preservation rights to the data (Fabric-CA certificate management can prove this), the preservation method does not infringe on others' privacy or trade secrets (Channel mechanism enables data minimization sharing), and the preservation platform holds legal operating qualifications. Relevance — blockchain can prove the logical relationships between subjects, time, and content on the data chain, but cannot automatically prove the legal relevance between these facts and the dispute's focal points — this still requires the judge's comprehensive assessment based on case facts.

Three Adjudicated Representative Cases. Case 1: A famous baijiu brand suing an e-commerce platform for selling counterfeits (Hangzhou Internet Court, 2023) — The brand used blockchain-preserved scan verification failure records (time, location, and verification results of consumers scanning counterfeit codes) as key evidence of counterfeit damage. The court found the blockchain electronic evidence valid, ordered the e-commerce platform to delist counterfeit listings and compensate the brand ¥2 million in economic losses. Case 2: A dairy company product liability dispute (Shanghai No. 1 Intermediate Court, 2024) — The dairy company preserved raw material inspection reports, production batch records, and cold chain logistics temperature data entirely on blockchain. In a consumer lawsuit alleging the product caused diarrhea, the complete, untampered traceability data chain proved the product's quality compliance before leaving the factory. The court dismissed the consumer's claim. Case 3: A brand suing a distributor for diversion breach of contract (Shenzhen Intermediate Court, 2024) — The brand used blockchain-preserved diversion detection records (distributor codes + scan geographic locations + LBS coordinate evidence) to prove the distributor's cross-regional sales breach. The court admitted the blockchain evidence and ruled the distributor liable for breach and compensation.

Compliance Design Highlights of ZhiShuYun's Blockchain Evidence Solution. Fabric consortium chain nodes are deployed on servers with Level 3 cybersecurity protection certification, satisfying preservation platform credibility requirements. Hash values of preserved data are periodically anchored to judicial blockchains (court nodes), enabling cross-chain verification. The entire preservation process is recorded end-to-end and generates a preservation certificate compliant with the Electronic Signature Law format, containing: preserved data original text, SHA-256 hash value, Fabric transaction ID, block height, trusted timestamp, and platform digital signature.