A new client called me this morning. We had a pleasant chat. She wanted me to help her to prepare an affidavit (a written statement confirmed by oath or affirmation, for use as evidence in court) for a property transaction. All was well, until I asked, “Where do you live, by the way?” While I expected her response would be somewhere in London, she instead told me that she lived in North England.

“Last time it took me 5 hours’ train ride to get to London, and everywhere was so crowded. Can we do it via Zoom or Skype instead?”

Well, in fact, that’s not an easy question to answer. The Commissioner for Oaths Act 1889 and Oaths Act 1978 do not state as a requirement that the deponent (i.e. the person taking the oath) must be physically present with the person administering the oath (for example, a solicitor). However, an affidavit must end by the person administering the oath signing and indicating that the affidavit was made ‘before me’. 

In the case of a statutory declaration, the Statutory Declarations Act 1835 actually requires that it must be made ‘before’ the one who administers it.

It has long since been the traditional view (that is, the view before the normalisation of the telephone, internet, smartphone or Zoom) that this means that the deponent and the person administering the oath must be in the same place when the oath is taken. 

The issue whether an oath can be administered remotely via a popular video conference platform (such Zoom, Skype or Google Meet) has been mooted recently, especially during the COVID pandemic, but it still does not seem to be a popular option as it brings risk to the validity of the oath. After all, no solicitor would use his client as a guinea pig and test this position in Court!

In a similar context, the First-tier Tribunal in Man Ching Yeun v Landy Chet Kin Wong [2019] UKFTT 2016/1089 held in its preliminary decision that the argument that a deed witnessed by a solicitor remotely via videoconference had not been validly executed has a reasonable prospect of success. Even though this is not a substantive decision (in a sense that the Tribunal did not give a definitive yes/no answer; it only said it was arguable), it cast doubt on the validity of a deed witnessed remotely. 

To err on the side of caution, I advised this client to seek another solicitor located in North England! However, if you have anything to attest in London, give Hillary Cooper Law a call. Our team of experienced and diverse lawyers share a breadth of knowledge and expertise that make us well-suited for your legal issues. We’re better, on your side.