Expert legal opinion
Audrie and Australian evidence law.
Dr Ian Freckelton AO KC’s assessment of Audrie’s authentication process and its evidentiary significance in Australian court proceedings.
Opinion dated 13 September 2026 · Commissioned by Audrie
Get the full legal opinion →The expert assessment
These public statements were approved by Dr Freckelton for use by Audrie. They accompany his memorandum of advice.
“Audrie's passkey-based signing process is materially stronger than a standard digital signature for establishing that a document is genuine and unaltered, and supports its admissibility as evidence in Australian courts.”
“A document authenticated through a process of this kind, cryptographically hashed, signed, and anchored as described to me, would generally satisfy the authentication requirements of the Evidence Act and attract the presumptions applying to machine-produced and business records. Properly supported by expert evidence, such a certificate is well placed to be admitted, and to carry real weight, in Australian court proceedings.”
What the opinion means
Does the opinion support the use of Audrie-authenticated documents as evidence?
Yes. Dr Freckelton’s opinion supports the evidentiary use of documents authenticated through the process described to him. He explains how authentication records and expert evidence can support inferences about authenticity and the presumptions for machine-produced and business records. Admissibility and evidentiary weight remain matters for the court in the particular proceeding.
Would expert evidence still be required?
The opinion says expert evidence would generally be required, particularly while the process is novel to Australian courts or where its operation is contested. The assessment is not a claim that every Audrie record is automatically self-proving.
Does authentication prove that a document’s contents are true?
No. Audrie records the file’s integrity, the signing event and the associated identity and timestamp. It does not assess the truth, accuracy or legal validity of the document’s contents, or establish the signatory’s legal authority, capacity or freedom from duress.
What does the opinion cover?
The memorandum addresses document authentication, hearsay and business records, machine-produced evidence, electronic transactions legislation, expert evidence, potential challenges, passkey authorisation and jurisdictional differences. It is based on the technical process described to Dr Freckelton, and is dated 13 September 2026.
The opinion considers the process described to Dr Freckelton. It does not guarantee the admissibility of every document or the outcome of a proceeding. The full memorandum sets out its reasoning and qualifications.
Read the complete advice
The reasoning behind the opinion.
The full memorandum explains the statutory framework, technical assumptions, evidentiary considerations and potential challenges behind the public statements.
- Authentication and electronic records
- Passkey authorisation and cryptographic signing
- Expert evidence and evidentiary weight
- Qualifications and jurisdictional considerations
Memorandum of advice · 13 September 2026
Get the full legal opinion
Read Dr Ian Freckelton AO KC’s complete assessment of Audrie’s authentication process and its evidentiary significance in Australia.
Free access via your verified work email. No Audrie account required.