{"id":6599,"date":"2020-01-30T17:05:54","date_gmt":"2020-01-30T17:05:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.riaabarkergillette.com\/uk\/?p=6599"},"modified":"2025-03-10T10:04:27","modified_gmt":"2025-03-10T10:04:27","slug":"dont-put-your-footer-in-it-when-it-comes-to-contracts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.riaabarkergillette.com\/uk\/dont-put-your-footer-in-it-when-it-comes-to-contracts\/","title":{"rendered":"Don\u2019t put your footer in it when it comes to contracts"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Although legislation to align e-signature standards across the EU was introduced by the Electronic Identification Regulation<\/a> in 2016 and the Electronic Communications Act 2000<\/a>, there remains confusion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Head of Corporate and Commercial Victoria Holland<\/a> explains:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cAs a general rule, no contract made under English law needs to be signed, or even be in writing, unless the contract is a guarantee for payment by someone else, or it relates to land or is made by deed. People often think they must sign on the dotted line to seal a deal but in many situations all that is needed is a clear agreement and intention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With the increased use of electronic communications in contractual negotiations, it is important for companies to understand all the different circumstances in which an exchange may form a binding contract.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Last year, the Law Commission published a report on the electronic execution of documents to tackle this uncertainty. The Law Commission confirmed that e-signatures could be used to execute documents as an alternative to wet ink signatures in most circumstances and relied upon as evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The recent case of Neocleous v Rees<\/a> signals a further shift in the approach to e-signatures with implications for anyone involved in electronic, contractual negotiations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The court ruled that including the writer\u2019s name in the automatic email footer amounted to an electronic signature and was sufficient to conclude a binding contract for transferring an interest in land.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The judge said that the email sender knew that his name would be added as a footer and, although it was an automatic process, it represented a conscious decision, combined with the name and contact details being in the conventional style of a signature, at the end of the document.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Head of Dispute Resolution, M. Qaiser Khanzada<\/a>, explains:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cThis case related to a fairly rare type of property transaction but has an important message for day-to-day communications. If companies are to avoid inadvertently entering into a contract with suppliers or customers, they should incorporate a clear disclaimer designed to prevent the accidental formation of a contract and not simply rely on an automatic proviso to their e-signatures.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

It follows that, as well as email footers, other methods that could create a valid signature include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n