Technical preservation and a Brazilian notarial record
Understand how technical capture differs from an ata notarial and where the approaches may complement each other.
Different procedures, different roles
VERATIU records a technical capture session and preserves the resulting files. It is not a notarial office and does not issue an ata notarial or claim the public authority associated with that Brazilian notarial instrument.
The Brazilian reference
The VERATIU guide refers to article 384 of the Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure when discussing an ata notarial: a notary records the existence and manner of a fact. A technical evidence package has a different origin and purpose.
When technical preservation can help
- Time-sensitive material: document content before it changes or disappears.
- File verification: preserve screenshots, relevant media, metadata, manifests and hashes.
- Repeatable collection: use an organized capture and handover process.
- Complementary material: retain technical records alongside originals, expert analysis, witness evidence or a notarial record where appropriate.
Other evidence in the Brazilian framework
The source guide discusses articles 369, 422 and 439–441 of the Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure in relation to evidence, reproductions and electronic documents. These references do not make a particular capture automatically admissible or sufficient.
Common questions
Can a technical capture replace an ata notarial in every case? No. The instruments have different legal characteristics, and the appropriate choice depends on the case.
Can both be used? They may serve complementary purposes. A lawyer should assess what the particular matter requires.
Does the service guarantee acceptance? No. The package supports technical review; the competent authority determines the evidential value.
Brazilian legal context
References to Brazilian legislation on this page concern Brazil. They do not describe the law of every country, create universal admissibility, or replace advice on the jurisdiction where the material will be used. The receiving court or authority evaluates the evidence in its specific context.