Galician company Legalpin has noted that the recent modification published in the Official State Gazette on the notification system in temporary disability and permanent disability procedures constitutes another step in a transformation that has been taking place progressively for years. In this regard, the Administration continues moving communications that have legal effects into the digital realm and consolidates a trend that transcends the realm of Social Security.
According Javier Meizoso, CEO of Legalpin: “We are not simply facing a channel change. We are facing a paradigm shift.” Meizoso explains that for decades, the legal certainty of notifications rested on physical media and highly formalized procedures. Today, however, the legislator accepts that electronic communication can offer the same guarantees, provided there is a system capable of reliably proving what was communicated, when it was made available to the recipient and at what moment it produced its effects.
The Administration has electronic offices, registries and platforms specifically designed for this. The private sector, however, faces a different challenge. Companies and professionals need to prove the existence and content of their communications using their own channels, in a context where evidentiary power is increasingly relevant.
Dispute Resolution Mechanisms (DRM)
Meizoso refers to the recently enacted Organic Law 1/2025, which strengthens Dispute Resolution Mechanisms (DRM), placing the verification of certain communications at the center of numerous civil and commercial proceedings. “In many cases it is no longer enough to state that a claim was filed or that a proposal was sent. It is necessary to be able to prove it,” Meizoso emphasizes.
This evolution is also backed by increasingly well-established case law. Our courts have been recognizing for years the evidentiary value of electronic communications when there are objective elements that allow proving their authenticity, integrity and traceability. The issue no longer centers so much on the medium used as on the quality of the evidence that can be presented in the proceeding.
In other words, an email can have full evidentiary value. What matters is the ability to prove aspects such as the content actually sent, the date and time of sending, its delivery to the recipient and, when technically feasible, its opening or reading.
