A man in Canada faced lawsuit due to a miscommunication over a ‘thumbs-up’ emoji. Chris Achter, a farmer, was supposed to deliver an item to a buyer named Kent Mickleborough, for which a contract was prepared and ‘signed’ using the emoji, but failed and now a local court has ordered him to pay $61,442 as a compensation to not fulfil the contract.
According to The Guardian, the court ruled that ‘thumbs-up’ can be considered as valid as a signature and it argued that there is a need to adapt to the ‘new reality’ of contemporary communication.
What is the case?
In March 2021, Mickleboroug, the buyer, sent out an advertisement that his company was going to buy 86 tonnes of flax.
An agreement was made between the buyer and Achter on the phone, after which a picture of a contract was texted asking the farmer to ‘please confirm the flax contract’ in the text.
Achter responded to the text message with a thumbs-up emoji but didn't deliver the flax as per the contract. The buyer filed a lawsuit disputing the meaning of the emoji.
What was the dispute?
Mickleborough pointed out that Achter's thumbs-up emoji as a response to the text message suggests that he agreed to the terms of the contract. However, the farmer said the response he sent was only to signify that he had received the contract, denying that he accepted it.
{{/usCountry}}Mickleborough pointed out that Achter's thumbs-up emoji as a response to the text message suggests that he agreed to the terms of the contract. However, the farmer said the response he sent was only to signify that he had received the contract, denying that he accepted it.
{{/usCountry}}“I did not have time to review the Flax Contract and merely wanted to indicate that I did receive his text message,” he said, as quoted by the English daily.
While hearing the case, the judge said a thumbs-up emoji is a “non-tradinational means to ‘sign’ a document but nevertheless under these circumstances this was a valid way to convey the two purposes of a ‘signature’.”
The judge further dismissed the farmer's concern that the fresh ruling ‘would open up the flood gates’ to new interpretations of other emojis, including the ‘fist bump’ and ‘hand shake’.