Be careful when using emojis as they are now considered our legal signature

The advent of social media and communication applications has brought into our lives different types of emoticons and emoticons, with which we quickly express our opinion, feelings, support or disagreement in a message we receive, in a post, in some news, article, etc. However, a court in Canada made a decision that could cause a real legal earthquake at the international level. The case concerned a grain trader who sent a mass letter to farmers announcing his intention to buy large quantities.

He accepted an offer from the flax plantation to cooperate, and eventually the merchant agreed to buy 86 tons of flax for about $13 a bushel. The merchant sent the farmer a contract and asked the farmer to confirm that he had received the contract and that everything was as agreed. The farmer responded to the merchant with an emoji as a receipt for the document. But then the price of flax rose and the farmer backed out of the deal.

The merchant sued the farmer, arguing that the emoji had intrinsic value as acceptance of the transaction. The farmer argued in court that with the emoji, he was simply telling the merchant that he had received the contract which he did not have time to read when he sent the emoji, and when he read it later he had some disagreements with him and did not follow through to complete the transaction.
In her opinion, Judge Timothy Keene said, “This court recognizes that emoji are an unconventional means of signing a document, and yet, under the circumstances, it was a valid method of conveying a signature between the parties.” .

Farmer’s lawyer argued in court that this decision opens up Aeolos’ bag so that emojis in general and not just the thumbs-up start to gain legal force, creating real chaos because someone would be able to translate a code sent to them from a user in contact and sue.