Can a ‘Printscreen’ or ‘Screenshot’ be used as evidence in court?

Can a screenshot be private?

The answer to this question is not clear-cut.

The determination of the circumstances of a case by the court requires the conduct of so-called evidentiary proceedings.

The catalogue of means of evidence in civil and criminal trials is not closed.

This means that evidence can be any medium of information that can contribute to the outcome of the case.

This also applies to the popular ‘printscreens’ and ‘screenshots’.

Printscreens as evidence in court cases

In court practice, screenshots of conversations of the parties involved or computer printouts documenting the relevant circumstances of the case are most common.

However, simply submitting them to court does not guarantee that they will be used.

Types of cases and the relevance of screenshots

A distinction must be made between the types of cases in which this evidence can be used:

• Civil cases: Popular screenshots may be admissible as evidence, particularly in family cases.

• They can document disputes over child contact, conversations between parents or the granting of a loan.

• Business cases:

• In these cases, the court will mainly rely on documents and screenshots will be considered as a supplement.

Authenticity and source of evidence

There are some doubts about the authenticity of the content presented and the possibility of interference by chat users.

Messages may be incomplete, out of context or partially deleted, which may affect their interpretation.

Often, the authenticity of the conversations is disputed by the other party, which requires additional evidence.

The source of obtaining printscreens is also an issue.

Illegal and malicious activities, such as hacking into applications, may give rise to criminal liability for breach of correspondence secrecy.

Implications for court proceedings

Not in every case will correspondence in the form of printscreens be admitted as evidence by the court.

The jurisprudence of common courts and the Supreme Court to date allows for such solutions, indicating the necessity of a thorough analysis by the court and confirmation of the authenticity of the presented content.

It is important to bear in mind the possibility of easy interference in this type of correspondence, which may lead to the use of inauthentic and manipulated content for the purpose of winning a lawsuit.