21/10/2025
💬⚖️ The Role of Social Media in Modern Contract Law
Can a simple 👍 emoji mean “I agree” to a contract?
Can your WhatsApp messages 💬 or even LinkedIn comments 💻 be used as evidence in court?
The line between a casual online reaction and a legally binding commitment is becoming thinner every day. Courts around the world 🌍 — from Ukraine to Latvia and Canada — are already recognizing that digital communication, including emojis, can reflect real intent and even serve as a form of consent 🖊️.
This evolving judicial practice shows how social media is transforming contract law, making it more flexible, dynamic, and tech-driven ⚡.
But with this transformation come new questions:
👉 When does a message or emoji equal an agreement?
👉 How can we authenticate online communication?
👉 What are the limits of digital consent?
⚖️💬 The Role of Social Media in Contract Law 💻📱
In today’s world, social media serves not only as a platform for communication and information exchange 🌐 but also as an important factor influencing various aspects of legal practice ⚖️.
In particular, social media has become a significant element in the context of contract law 🤝.
Through social networks, parties to legal relationships can discuss terms of cooperation and the conclusion of relevant agreements 💬📩, which may affect their interpretation and performance — since publicly expressed intent can be recognized as legally binding ✅.
At the same time, materials contained in social networks can be used as evidence in contractual disputes 🧾.
In particular, text messages, comments, or even posts may play an important role in determining various legal aspects of relationships 🕵️♂️📱.
📚⚖️ Electronic Correspondence: Judicial Practice
In this regard, it is worth noting the legal position of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of Ukraine 🇺🇦, set out in its ruling of June 21, 2023, in case No. 916/3027/21, according to which the court may consider electronic correspondence between individuals in a messenger (as well as any other correspondence) as evidence in a case only if it allows the court to identify the authors of the correspondence and its content 🧑⚖️📨.
“The Supreme Court consistently adheres to the legal position that printouts of electronic correspondence are neither written evidence nor electronic documents (or copies thereof) within the meaning of Part 1, Article 5 of the Law of Ukraine ‘On Electronic Documents and Electronic Document Circulation,’ which could, together with other evidence in the case, reliably confirm the facts of the conclusion and performance of contracts between the parties in specific relations.”
At the same time, if, given the specific circumstances of the case ⚖️, the court concludes that the correspondence makes it possible to identify its participants and may confirm certain arguments of the parties — such as the existence of relations between them, conduct of negotiations, etc. — the court may accept such correspondence as evidence and assess it in conjunction with other evidence in the case.
Similarly, message exchanges 💬, joint participation in groups 👥, and reactions to posts 👍 can all be considered manifestations of intent to create de facto contracts between users.
Thus, in its ruling of October 4, 2023 (case No. 991/2396/22), the Supreme Court recognized correspondence in WhatsApp 💬 as evidence of communication between individuals regarding the conclusion of a civil transaction.
“Under such circumstances, the appellate court’s conclusion regarding the examination of correspondence in the ‘WhatsApp’ messenger between PERSON_3 and PERSON_1 is justified, as this correspondence, together with other evidence, confirms their communication concerning the sale of assets, the legitimacy of which was under consideration,” the ruling emphasized.
😊👍 Emojis as an Element of Consent
An equally interesting aspect of electronic correspondence can be found in foreign practice 🌍, particularly in Latvia 🇱🇻, where the Civil Division of the Riga Regional Court ruled that the “thumbs up” 👍 emoji in work correspondence could be interpreted as written consent 🖋️.
👨💻 According to the case materials, a specialist worked remotely, and management instructed him via the Slack messenger to come to the office on a specific day.
The employee reacted to the message with a “thumbs up” emoji 👍 but did not show up — leading to his dismissal.
When resolving the labor dispute ⚖️, the court referred to the Latvian Civil Code, which provides that in cases of doubt regarding the meaning of words, one should be guided by their definition and the clearly expressed or demonstrated intention of the parties.
📖 The court referred to the Cambridge Dictionary, which defines the “thumbs up” emoji as “an expression of approval or agreement.”
The judges noted that the claimant could not have failed to understand the meaning of this emoji.
Similarly, in Canada 🇨🇦, a local court equated the “thumbs up” emoji 👍 to a digital signature 💻🖊️.
📦 In that case, the claimant ordered 86 tons of flax 🌾 from the defendant in 2021.
The parties negotiated the details by phone 📞, after which the claimant sent a text message with the delivery contract and the request: “Please confirm the flax contract.”
The defendant replied with a “thumbs up” emoji 👍 — but never delivered the goods.
The Court of King’s Bench for Saskatchewan ruled in favor of the claimant 🏛️, noting that while a signature is the “classic representation” of identity confirmation, emojis may also serve as modern tools of expressing consent in digital communication 💬✨.
“I agree that this case is new (at least in Saskatchewan), but nonetheless, this court cannot attempt to stop the tide of technology and its universal use,” the judge concluded 🌊⚖️.
🧩 Conclusions
As shown by judicial practice from various countries 🌍, social media is transforming contract law — making it more flexible, dynamic, and adaptable to modern communication tools 📱💼.
At the same time, this new dimension gives rise to several legal challenges ⚖️ — such as the legal status of emojis — which can be defined as tools suitable for expressing consent 🖊️ or digital signature 💬 in the sphere of virtual communication.
⚠️ This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For personalized assistance, please seek professional legal consultation.
Follow us on 👉 Madika Legal Advisory’s Telegram channel: Legal for Non-Legal ✨t.me/madikalegaladvisory
![[ARM🇦🇲] «Աշխարհի որևէ վայրում տեղի ունեցող անարդարությունը սպառնալիք է համընդհանուր արդարությանը։» 🌍⚖️Մարտին Լյութեր Քի...](https://img4.juridipedia.com/569/062/672719065690629.jpg)
