Al Vigier
Published: 2/26/2025
A Saskatchewan farmer learned that a thumbs-up emoji can cost you over $80K. And now the farmer hopes the Supreme Court of Canada will bail him out.
Chris Achter, who runs Achter Land & Cattle Ltd., got sued after responding to an offer proposal with a simple 👍. The company on the other end, South West Terminal Ltd. (SWT), took that as a legally binding “yes.” When Achter didn’t deliver the 87 metric tonnes of flax he was supposed to, SWT took him to court. SWT won in court twice.
Now, after losing at both the Court of King’s Bench and the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, Achter Land & Cattle Ltd. is making one last attempt to fight it, trying to get the Supreme Court to hear his case.
It all started in March 2021 when an SWT rep texted Achter a photo of a signed contract and asked him to confirm. Instead of saying anything, Achter Land & Cattle Ltd. just dropped a thumbs-up emoji and moved on with their day. That casual response became a nightmare when the courts ruled it was the equivalent of signing on the dotted line.
The reasoning was that Achter and SWT had been doing business together for nearly a decade, and in the past, he had confirmed contracts with quick messages like “yup” or “ok.” This time, the emoji was just another variation of that. So when Achter Land & Cattle Ltd. didn’t hold up his end of the deal, SWT sued, and the courts backed them up.
He was on the hook in 2023 for about $82,200 plus interest, and when he appealed in December 2024, he lost again. The court ruling reinforced the idea that, under the right circumstances, an emoji can lock you into a contract.
The bigger legal question is whether this ruling sets a precedent for digital communication in contract law. Lawyer Tony Merchant says this isn’t as crazy as it sounds.
Contract law has evolved from wax seals to handwritten signatures to even handshakes or verbal agreements. Courts are trying to adapt to today’s world, where business happens over texts and emails.
What’s the difference between a thumbs-up emoji and an electronic signature?
SWT’s lawyer, Josh Morrison, argues this case is pretty specific. Since Achter and SWT already had a history of sealing deals with short, casual responses, this wasn’t some shocking new legal principle. It was just business as usual.
The big hurdle is getting the Supreme Court actually to take the case. They don’t hear appeals just because someone’s mad about losing. The Supreme Court of Canada only steps in if a significant legal issue is at stake.
For now, though, the court ruling stands. If you’re doing business over text, maybe think twice before firing off that emoji.
