Can a “👍” Sell a House? What REALTORS® Should Know About “Emoji Law”
What courts are saying about emoji use in contractual discussions.
Since 2023, the Courts in Saskatchewan have been wrestling with the notion that a “thumbs up” emoji may be able to establish acceptance of an offer and create a binding contract. Recently, the British Columbia Supreme Court made clear it believes this “emoji law” doesn’t quite apply to real estate transactions.
At the heart of it, an agreement of purchase and sale is a contract. It requires the agreement of essential terms:
- an offer;
- acceptance of that offer; and
- consideration (that’s legal-speak for something of value being exchanged—usually money).
So why are these two court decisions involving contracts seemingly at odds with each other…and what’s next?
Hint: we're not considering adding emojis to CREA WEBForms® at this time—unless, of course, the Supreme Court of Canada insists.
The Saskatchewan Case: Achter Land & Cattle Ltd. v South West Terminal Ltd
South West Terminal Ltd (South West) had previously purchased grain from Achter Land & Cattle Ltd (Achter). In past deals, South West prepared a standard form contract and Achter would sign them. But in this case, when South West texted the contract, rather than signing it, Achter responded with a “thumbs up” emoji (👍).
Achter never delivered the grain.
A dispute ensued.
South West claimed breach of contract.
Achter argued there was no contract.
The contract was valued was approximately $58,225.62.
The Court found that the parties had agreed upon the essential terms creating an enforceable agreement. The “thumbs up” emoji constituted acceptance of the contract—akin to a digital signature. The matter even went to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal and was upheld.
But not all courts are ready to give emojis that much power.
The British Columbia Case: Ross v Garvey
Meanwhile in Saanich, British Columbia, Ross and the Garveys were negotiating the sale of a 115-year-old property. As you can imagine, the contract value (~ $760,000) was much higher than the grain contract in Saskatchewan.
Spoiler! The British Columbia Court considered legal formalities in real estate transactions and, to lesser extent, value when making its decision.
The buyer, Ross, prepared an offer for the property.
The sellers, the Garveys, drafted a counteroffer but did not sign it.
The buyer emailed the sellers informing them that he accepted their counteroffer.
The buyer confirm acceptance, again, by text message.
One of the sellers responded to the text with a…you guessed it…a “thumbs up” emoji.
The sellers never put their signatures on a counteroffer.
A legal dispute arose.
The buyer claimed there was a binding contract; the sellers asserted they had not signed a contract.
The British Columbia Court sided with the sellers noting that under British Columbia laws, the sale of land requires a signature. A “thumbs up” emoji could not replace the requirement of a wet or digital signature in a real estate transaction contract.
Where do we go from here?
Achter, the grain supplier in the Saskatchewan case, filed a leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”). Meaning that Canada’s top court may soon weigh in on whether an emoji can indicate acceptance of a contract and bind the parties.
The SCC can either grant the application (and hear the case) or dismiss it (effectively agreeing with decision of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal).
While the SCC only hears about 10% of leave applications, the fact that courts in different provinces have reached different conclusions might just tempt the SCC to weigh in.
And, let’s be honest—how often does the SCC get to drop emojis into a ruling?
Takeaways
- Practice safe emoji-ing.
- When it comes to formalizing the agreement of purchase and sale, it may be best to stick to a pen or digital signature.
The cases referenced in this article can be found online in full:
