Judge orders Canadian farmer to pay $92k over thumbs-up emoji

A judge has ordered a farmer to pay a small fortune after he failed to deliver a product – after using a thumbs-up emoji in a text.

A thumbs-up emoji has cost a Canadian farmer a whopping $122,000.

A Canadian farmer is being forced to pay for a breach of contract after using a thumbs-up emoji in a text.

The bizarre saga began when farmer Chris Achter was discussing a grain order with buyer Kent Mickleborough, who worked for South West Terminal Ltd (SWT), in 2021.

A contract was then drafted for SWT to buy 86 tonnes of flax from Mr Achter for $25 a bushel, to be delivered in November that year.

Mr Mickleborough signed the contract and took a photo of it before sending it in a text message to Mr Achter with the message: “Please confirm flax contract”.

Mr Achter replied with a thumbs-up emoji – but the flax delivery never arrived in November, and by that time, the cost of flax had skyrocketed to $61 per bushel.

The saga began as a grain buyer and seller were discussing a contract via text. Picture: iStock

Now, the Court of King’s Bench in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan has ordered Mr Achter to pay $C82,000 ($A92,000) after declaring that the emoji signified he had entered into a legally-binding contract, which was then breached.

According to legal documents seen by news.com.au, Mr Achter claimed he used the thumbs-up emoji to confirm he had received the contract and “understood the complete contract would follow by fax or email”, for him to look into further.

“I deny that he accepted the thumbs-up emoji as a digital signature of the incomplete contract,” he said.

“I did not have time to review the Flax Contract and merely wanted to indicate that I did receive his text message.”

His legal team also argued that “allowing a simple [thumbs up] emoji to signify identity and acceptance would open up the flood gates to allow all sorts of cases coming forward asking for interpretations as to what various different emojis mean … Counsel argues the courts will be inundated with all kinds of cases if this court finds that the [thumbs up] emoji can take the place of a signature.”

However, SWT insisted the emoji meant Mr Achter had accepted the contract, with Mr Mickleborough claiming he had previously done business with Mr Achter’s company “by having Chris execute the contract by text message”.

The court found a thumbs-up emoji is a non-traditional means to ‘sign’ a document. Picture: iStock

In his summary judgment, Justice Timothy Keene said the case “led parties to a far flung search for the equivalent of the Rosetta stone in cases from Israel, New York State and some tribunals in Canada, etc. to unearth what a [thumbs-up] emoji means” before ordering Mr Achter to pay.

“This court readily acknowledges that a [thumbs-up] emoji is a non-traditional means to ‘sign’ a document but nevertheless under these circumstances this was a valid way to convey the two purposes of a ‘signature’,” he said.

“This Court cannot (nor should it) attempt to stem the tide of technology and common usage – this appears to be the new reality in Canadian society and courts will have to be ready to meet the new challenges that may arise from the use of emojis and the like.”