Skip to main content
Records Authority
Category: E-Discovery and Legal Holds

The Sedona Principles

Also known as: Sedona Principles, The Sedona Principles, Third Edition
Simply put

The Sedona Principles are a set of best practices and recommendations for handling electronically stored information (ESI) when it must be produced in legal disputes. They were developed by The Sedona Conference, a nonprofit research and educational institute focused on law and policy, to guide organizations and legal practitioners in dealing with electronic documents during litigation. Because they represent guidance rather than binding law, their application depends on the relevant jurisdiction and the circumstances of each matter.

Formal definition

The Sedona Principles, currently issued in a Third Edition, are a body of best practices, recommendations, and principles published by The Sedona Conference to address issues arising from electronically stored information (ESI) in the context of electronic document production during litigation. They are intended as authoritative but non-binding professional guidance rather than statute or rule, and their weight and adoption vary by jurisdiction and by how courts and parties choose to apply them. The Principles focus specifically on the discovery and production of electronic evidence in legal proceedings; they should not be treated as a comprehensive records management or information governance framework, though sound recordkeeping practices may support compliance with the obligations they address. Practitioners should consult the current edition and applicable procedural rules, as specific clauses, scope, and terminology may differ from summaries provided here.

Why it matters

Electronically stored information (ESI) presents challenges that traditional, paper-oriented discovery practices were not designed to address, including questions of volume, format, metadata, accessibility, and the cost and burden of production. The Sedona Principles matter because they offer a widely referenced body of professional guidance that helps organizations and legal practitioners approach these challenges in a consistent and defensible way. By articulating best practices and recommendations for handling ESI during litigation, they provide a shared vocabulary and set of reasonable expectations that courts and parties can draw upon when disputes over electronic evidence arise.

Because the Principles represent guidance rather than binding law, their significance lies in their persuasive and educational weight rather than in any enforceable authority. They are published by The Sedona Conference, a nonpartisan, nonprofit research and educational institute dedicated to the study of law and policy. How much influence the Principles carry in any given matter depends on the jurisdiction and on how courts and parties choose to apply them, so practitioners should treat them as an aid to reasoning rather than as a substitute for applicable procedural rules.

For records and information governance professionals, the Principles are relevant chiefly at the point where recordkeeping practices intersect with litigation readiness. Sound information management can support an organization's ability to meet the obligations the Principles address, but the Principles focus specifically on the discovery and production of electronic evidence. They should not be mistaken for a comprehensive records management or information governance framework.

Who it's relevant to

Litigation and e-discovery counsel
Lawyers managing the discovery and production of electronic evidence often draw on the Principles as a source of persuasive, non-binding guidance. Their usefulness in any particular case depends on the jurisdiction and on how the court and opposing parties choose to apply them, so they are consulted alongside the governing procedural rules.
Records and information governance professionals
Those responsible for recordkeeping may find that sound information management practices support an organization's ability to meet the ESI obligations the Principles address. It is important to note, however, that the Principles focus on discovery and production in litigation and are not a comprehensive records management or information governance framework.
Compliance and legal operations teams
Teams charged with litigation readiness and the coordination of legal processes can use the Principles to inform defensible, consistent approaches to handling electronic documents. Because the guidance is non-binding and varies in adoption across jurisdictions, it should be applied with attention to the specific procedural context of each matter.

Inside The Sedona Principles

Purpose and Scope
The Sedona Principles are a set of consensus guidelines developed to address the identification, preservation, collection, review, and production of electronically stored information (ESI) in the context of litigation and discovery. They are primarily oriented toward United States civil litigation practice and should be understood within that jurisdictional context rather than as a universal recordkeeping standard.
Focus on Electronically Stored Information (ESI)
The principles concentrate on the distinct challenges posed by ESI as opposed to paper records, including the volume, dynamic nature, and metadata characteristics of electronic information. They inform how organizations approach the discovery obligations attached to such information.
Reasonableness and Proportionality
A recurring theme is that discovery efforts should be reasonable and proportionate to the needs of the matter, balancing the potential relevance of information against the burden and cost of preserving and producing it. The application of these concepts typically depends on the specific circumstances of a matter and applicable procedural rules.
Preservation and Legal Hold
The principles address the duty to preserve potentially relevant information once litigation is reasonably anticipated, a duty commonly operationalized through legal holds. Preservation in this sense suspends ordinary disposition activities for affected information; the precise triggers and obligations depend on jurisdiction and the facts of the matter.
Relationship to Records Management
While the principles intersect with records management and information governance, for example, where retention schedules and disposition practices affect what information exists at the time of a dispute, they are guidance for discovery practice rather than a records management standard such as ISO 15489. The two domains overlap but are distinct in purpose.

Common questions

Answers to the questions practitioners most commonly ask about The Sedona Principles.

Are The Sedona Principles legally binding rules that courts are required to follow?
No. The Sedona Principles are a set of best-practice recommendations and commentary developed to guide practice, not binding law. They are influential and have been cited in judicial reasoning in some jurisdictions, but they do not carry the force of statute or court rule. Their persuasive weight depends on the jurisdiction, the court, and the context, and organizations should treat them as guidance to be reconciled with the actual legal and regulatory requirements that apply to them.
Do The Sedona Principles apply universally across all countries and legal systems?
Not universally. The Principles emerged from and are most closely associated with a particular legal tradition and its approach to discovery, and their applicability varies by jurisdiction. Some concepts translate to other legal systems, while others may not map cleanly onto regimes with different procedural rules or disclosure obligations. They should be read as jurisdictionally situated guidance rather than a global standard, and their relevance depends on the legal system and sector in which an organization operates.
How can an organization use The Sedona Principles to inform its approach to preserving potentially relevant information?
Organizations often draw on the Principles to shape defensible practices around identifying, preserving, and managing electronically stored information when litigation or an investigation is reasonably anticipated. In practice this typically means using the guidance to inform legal hold procedures, scoping decisions about what must be preserved, and documentation of those decisions. Because obligations to preserve arise from the applicable legal framework rather than from the Principles themselves, the guidance should be applied alongside, and reconciled with, the specific duties that govern the matter.
What is the relationship between The Sedona Principles and an organization's records management and retention practices?
The Principles are generally concerned with the handling of electronically stored information in the context of discovery, which overlaps with but is distinct from routine records management. Well-governed retention and disposition practices can support defensibility by ensuring that information is managed consistently and that disposition follows documented policy rather than ad hoc decisions. When a preservation obligation arises, ordinary disposition of relevant material is typically suspended for the affected information. Organizations often align their records retention schedules and legal hold processes so that lifecycle management and litigation readiness work together rather than in conflict.
How should proportionality considerations described in the guidance be applied in practice?
The guidance reflects the idea that the effort and cost of preserving and producing information should bear a reasonable relationship to the needs of the matter. In practice, organizations often use this to justify scoping decisions, such as the sources, custodians, and date ranges included in a preservation or collection effort. Because what counts as proportionate depends on the specific facts, the applicable procedural rules, and the tribunal involved, such decisions should be documented with the reasoning behind them, and organizations should be prepared to revisit scope as a matter develops.
What role can The Sedona Principles play in demonstrating a defensible process?
The Principles are frequently used to support the position that an organization acted reasonably and in good faith when managing information for discovery. Demonstrating defensibility typically depends less on achieving a perfect outcome than on following a documented, consistent, and reasonable process. Aligning practices with widely recognized guidance, and recording the decisions made and their rationale, can help support that showing. What is considered defensible ultimately depends on the jurisdiction, the tribunal, and the circumstances of the individual matter.

Common misconceptions

The Sedona Principles are a legally binding standard or regulation.
They are consensus guidance developed to inform practice and judicial reasoning, not legislation or a binding regulatory instrument. Their influence depends on adoption by courts and practitioners, and their weight can vary across jurisdictions and matters.
The Sedona Principles apply universally across all jurisdictions.
They are oriented primarily toward United States civil litigation and discovery practice. Discovery, disclosure, and preservation obligations differ substantially across jurisdictions, so the principles should not be treated as a global rule set.
The Sedona Principles are a records management or retention framework.
They address the handling of electronically stored information in discovery, not the full records lifecycle of creation, classification, retention, and disposition. Records management standards and information governance frameworks serve different, though sometimes overlapping, purposes.

Best practices

Treat the Sedona Principles as guidance to inform discovery and preservation practice rather than as a binding standard, and confirm how they interact with the procedural rules of the relevant jurisdiction.
Implement legal hold procedures that suspend routine disposition of potentially relevant electronically stored information once litigation is reasonably anticipated, documenting the scope and timing of the hold.
Apply reasonableness and proportionality when scoping preservation, collection, and production, weighing the relevance of information against the burden and cost involved in the specific matter.
Coordinate records management and information governance functions with legal and discovery teams so that retention schedules and disposition practices are consistent with preservation obligations.
Maintain clear documentation of preservation, collection, and production decisions to support the defensibility of your approach if it is later scrutinized.
Seek qualified legal advice for specific matters, since the application of these principles depends on jurisdiction, sector, and the facts of each dispute.