Back

Document the evidential weight of the information and the information processing assets.


CONTROL ID
00624
CONTROL TYPE
Establish/Maintain Documentation
CLASSIFICATION
Preventive

SUPPORTING AND SUPPORTED CONTROLS



This Control directly supports the implied Control(s):
  • Establish, implement, and maintain an e-discovery program., CC ID: 00976

This Control has the following implementation support Control(s):
  • Tailor the e-discovery search methodology to evolve with e-discovery rules., CC ID: 00625
  • Use precedent from the context of paper discovery in the context of e-discovery., CC ID: 00626


SELECTED AUTHORITY DOCUMENTS COMPLIED WITH



  • The rules of evidence shall not be applied to deny the admissibility of a data message as evidence merely because it is a data message. (§ 8(1)(a), The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, 2002)
  • The rules of evidence shall not be applied to deny the admissibility of a data message as evidence on the grounds that it is not in its original form, if it is the best evidence the person could reasonably be expected to obtain. (§ 8(1)(b), The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, 2002)
  • Information in a data message shall be given due evidential weight. (§ 8(2), The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, 2002)
  • The reliability of the way a data message was generated, stored, or communicated shall be taken into consideration when assessing the evidential weight of a data message. (§ 8(3)(a), The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, 2002)
  • The reliability of the way the data message integrity was maintained shall be taken into consideration when assessing the evidential weight of a data message. (§ 8(3)(b), The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, 2002)
  • The way that the originator was identified shall be taken into consideration when assessing the evidential weight of a data message. (§ 8(3)(c), The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, 2002)
  • All relevant factors shall be taken into consideration when assessing the evidential weight of a data message. (§ 8(3)(d), The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, 2002)
  • A data message created by a person in the ordinary course of business or a copy, printout, or extract from a data message certified to be correct by an officer in the service of the person shall be admissible in evidence against any person and rebuttable proof of the facts contained in the record, c… (§ 8(4), The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, 2002)
  • Evidence which is obtained by interception in violation of this act shall not be admissible in any criminal proceedings except with the leave of the court, and when granting or refusing the leave, the court shall have regard to the circumstances in how it was obtained, the potential effect of its ad… (§ 111, The Electronic Communications and Transactions Act, 2002)
  • The integrity of evidence should be protected by having evidence reviewed by an impartial, independent expert to ensure that it meets legal requirements. (CF.11.04.08c, The Standard of Good Practice for Information Security)
  • The integrity of evidence should be protected by having evidence reviewed by an impartial, independent expert to ensure that it meets legal requirements. (CF.11.04.08c, The Standard of Good Practice for Information Security, 2013)
  • "Records managers need to be aware of the potential for legal challenge when documents are presented in evidence to a court of law. If the integrity or authenticity of a record is called into doubt in court by suggestions of tampering, incompetence, improper system functionality or malfunction, the … (§ 5.3, ISO 15489-2: 2001, Information and Documentation: Records management: Part 2: Guidelines)
  • Records managers require evidence showing the organization is continually complying with legislation, principles, policies, procedures, and processes, especially for periods past current employee's employment. (§ 5.2 ¶ 2, ISO 15489-2: 2001, Information and Documentation: Records management: Part 2: Guidelines)
  • Records managers need to have readily available evidence that shows and proves the organization has complied with policies, procedures, and legislation. (§ 5.3 ¶ 2, ISO 15489-2: 2001, Information and Documentation: Records management: Part 2: Guidelines)
  • The electronic discovery burdens should be proportional to the nature of the case and the amount of data in controversy. (Comment 2.b ¶ 2, The Sedona Principles Addressing Electronic Document Production)
  • The organization should present the opposing counsel and the court with a reasonable plan for preserving and producing relevant Electronically Stored Information that accurately represents the costs, burdens, and complexities of preservation and production, and the need and relevance of production. (Comment 2.e ¶ 1, The Sedona Principles Addressing Electronic Document Production)
  • A party should be required to demonstrate a substantial need to discover information about the programs and computer system used and that there is no reasonable alternative, in order to justify an onsite inspection of a respondent's computer systems. (Comment 6.c ¶ 3, The Sedona Principles Addressing Electronic Document Production)
  • The requesting party has to show the responding party's preservation and production steps for Electronically Stored Information were inadequate, on a motion to compel. (Prin. 7, The Sedona Principles Addressing Electronic Document Production)
  • The moving party must demonstrate that the responding party's response was inadequate and additional efforts are warranted, on a motion to compel. (Comment 7.a ¶ 2, The Sedona Principles Addressing Electronic Document Production)
  • The requesting party is required to demonstrate that the need and relevance outweighs the burdens and costs of retrieving and processing Electronically Stored Information from sources that are not reasonably accessible. (Prin. 8, The Sedona Principles Addressing Electronic Document Production)
  • The parties should communicate with each other early in the discovery process about the possible relevance of deleted Electronically Stored Information, in order to avoid unnecessary and costly preservation or claims of spoliation. (Comment 9.b ¶ 3, The Sedona Principles Addressing Electronic Document Production)
  • An order entered by the court should provide that the inadvertent disclosure of a privileged document or work product document does not constitute a waiver of privilege, the return or destruction of the privileged document, and notes or copies that discuss the privileged document or work product inf… (Comment 10.a ¶ 3, The Sedona Principles Addressing Electronic Document Production)
  • All documents, data compilations, and tangible objects must be preserved as evidence until the court proceedings are complete. (§ 77z-2(b)(2), Securities Act of 1933)
  • All documents, data compilations, and tangible objects must be preserved as evidence, until the court proceedings are complete. (§ 78u-4(b)(3), Securities Exchange Act of 1934)