Though this isn’t a US headline, it does happen to our maple syrup loving neighbors to the North, and – sadly at times – their decisions bleed over into the USA, just as our policies bleed into theirs. Let us know what you think – was this a good or bad decision?
In an unusual turn of events, a Canadian farmer has found himself on the hook for a staggering $82,000 due to a breach of contract, all because of a seemingly innocent “thumbs-up” emoji in a text message. According to court documents from the King’s Bench for Saskatchewan, grain purchasers from South West Terminal (SWT) were seeking to buy flax from farmers Bob and Chris Achter at a price of $17 per bushel for delivery later that year.
After some discussions, SWT drafted a contract specifically for Chris Achter to sell them 86 metric tons of flax, with the agreed-upon delivery date set for November. The contract was signed by an SWT representative and then sent as a photo via cell phone to Chris along with a message requesting confirmation. Now, here’s where things take a peculiar twist – Chris responded to this contract with a simple “thumbs-up” emoji.
Fast forward to November, and the flax was never delivered. It may be worth mentioning that by that time, the market price for flax had risen to $41 per bushel. In court documents, the SWT representative mentioned that he had engaged in multiple text contracts with Achter in the past. The only difference this time was the use of the “thumbs-up” emoji instead of a typical “ok,” “yup,” or “looks good.”
However, according to Achter’s account in the court documents, the thumbs-up emoji merely signified his receipt of the contract. He claimed that it did not imply his agreement with the contract’s terms. Achter stated that the complete terms and conditions were expected to be sent to him for review and signing through fax or email. He also argued that his interactions with SWT had been informal, with frequent text messages.
Achter’s counsel expressed concerns that accepting a simple emoji as a sign of acceptance could open the floodgates to countless cases involving interpretations of various emojis. They warned that the courts would be inundated with disputes over the meanings of emojis such as a fist bump or a handshake. The counsel believed that allowing the thumbs-up emoji to replace a signature would set a problematic precedent.
Furthermore, Achter emphasized that he would never agree to a contract for a product without including an Act of God clause – though, how that helps in this particular case is not exactly clear. And the judge took a different stance. In their ruling, the judge found that the deal had been verbally struck, and the use of the thumbs-up emoji indicated Chris’s approval of the contract, just as he had done on previous occasions. The judge believed that, considering the context and background, a reasonable bystander would interpret the situation as a meeting of the minds.
Consequently, the judge ordered Achter to pay SWT a hefty sum of $82,000, along with interest and costs, for failing to deliver the flax as agreed. Unfortunately, neither party could be reached for comment regarding this peculiar case.
What are your thoughts? Is there precedence for this type of thing in the US you know of?
