Court judgement:👍 does not necessarily mean general consent
In Munich, a property agent and a car dealer were in dispute over a down payment of around 60,000 euros. The estate agent had used emojis to give his consent to an extension of the deadline for delivery of the car. The estate agent and the Higher Regional Court took a different view.
A case at the Higher Regional Court in Munich has dealt with the significance of emojis in the context of legally binding declarations of intent. The judgement fundamentally states that messenger texts are also considered declarations of intent that are subject to the general rules of the doctrine of legal transactions.
This may also include chat emojis, as they take on "functions such as intonation, gestures, facial expressions and other body language elements in real conversations". So be careful when using emojis when it comes to money! The interpretation of emojis, on the other hand, is much more difficult to judge.
Consenting emojis should count as consent for deadline extension
A real estate agent had ordered a new Ferrari from a car dealer. He made a down payment of around 60,000 euros. The delivery deadline was exceeded and the buyer cancelled the contract. However, the dealer did not want to enforce the cancellation of the purchase contract and retained the deposit. The buyer therefore sued for repayment and the case went to the Munich II Regional Court.
Source: Debora Pape
However, the seller referred to a chat history and argued that the buyer had expressed consent for an extension of the deadline. This means that the seller assumed that they would have more time to deliver the car. The seller even demanded compensation from the buyer, as he had to sell the Ferrari for significantly less than the agreed price after all the disputes.
However, the regional court dismissed the buyer's claim. He had agreed to the extension of the deadline and could therefore not reclaim the deposit. The buyer then appealed in February 2024 and the case ended up before the Munich Higher Regional Court. The WhatsApp history and the emojis used were dissected in detail.
A seemingly non-binding chat history becomes the basis for judgement
The purchase contract stipulated a non-binding delivery date "in the second or third quarter of 2021". A reminder and ultimately a withdrawal from the contract was therefore only possible two quarters later, i.e. from 1 April 2022.
Towards the end of the third quarter, on 21 September 2021, the seller informed the buyer via WhatsApp that delivery would be postponed until the first half of 2022. The buyer replied: "Oops 😬". Upon request, the seller provided a document from the manufacturer confirming the car order as binding. The plaintiff responded with 👍.
On 27 January 2022, the buyer got in touch: "First half of the year has started. 😄 Any sign of life from Ferrari as to when the car can be expected?". The seller replied that a transaction would be possible from 9 May, the buyer replied "Pass". When the dealer also reported a delay on 9 May, the buyer set a deadline of 31 May 2022 by which the car had to be delivered - which did not happen.
😬, 👍 and 😄 under the magnifying glass of the Munich Higher Regional Court
As a result, the frustrated buyer withdrew from the contract on 1 June and demanded a refund of the deposit. The dealer, on the other hand, argued that the delivery period had been extended by mutual agreement until 30 June 2022. He based this on the chat history: The buyer had given his consent to the deadline extension through the emojis.
The grimacing face 😬 is difficult to interpret as consent in general use, which is also how the court of appeal sees it. Even if there is room for interpretation, it is "in no way associated" with an affirmative statement. The buyer merely wanted to express surprise or astonishment with the "oops 😬".
The thumbs-up emoji 👍, which, according to common emoji dictionaries and real-life usage, basically signals "approval, agreement or recognition", is more unambiguous. However, it did not refer to the delayed delivery, but to the fact that the manufacturer had actually received the order.
The laughing emoji 😄 does convey a positive, warm mood, according to the court. However, the judgement states that it is "not possible to infer consent to the extension of the deadline from this". At most, it was to be seen as an expression of "unspecific anticipation or hope" on the part of the buyer.
The court ultimately agreed with the plaintiff, the former buyer, and ruled that the deposit including interest should be refunded.
Feels just as comfortable in front of a gaming PC as she does in a hammock in the garden. Likes the Roman Empire, container ships and science fiction books. Focuses mostly on unearthing news stories about IT and smart products.