This applies in particular to parties who use e-mails to discuss or propose possible contractual offers, counter-offers and conditions. But also emails without proposals for contractual clauses in them can be held as binding contracts between correspondents. The applicant argued that the agreement also includes the obligation for the defendant to acquire a minimum amount of USD 1.3 million during that period, which the defendant disputed on the ground that they had not committed to purchase products unless it submitted a specific order. The defendant asserted that Superdrug`s terms and conditions of purchase did not indicate that they were appropriate to purchase minimum quantities or that they were related to such conditions if an employee accepted them. So you have to look back through the emails to see exactly what was said and determine the trust your client placed in that statement. Finally, a real estate agent from Grubb-Ellis v. Porter Ranch Shopping Center, LLC sued his clients for not paying the commission allegedly due. The client stated that there was no money to pay since an email exchange reduced the initial commission amount from 2% to 1.5% (a reduction of more than $128,000). The brokerage company replied that the listing agreement only allowed the contract to be amended if an owner and agent of the company signed a written amendment.
The court imposed the e-mail amendment and refers in part to the UETA, although no company owner or official participated in the email. In Forcelli v. Gelco, a representative of Gelco`s insurance company, offered the applicant $230,000 to settle the matter first orally and then repeat it in an e-mail. The complainant agreed, but when Gelco attempted to terminate the payment after winning the case a few days later, the New York Appeal Division decided, in a separate case, that the e-mail constituted a legally binding contract and that Gelco was required to pay the full amount offered. The Tribunal`s decision was based on the following factors: as we have seen, e-mails can be legally binding. So he sticks to one last question. In order to return to the fundamental right of the contract, the parties must, in order to enter into a binding contract, generally satisfy the following: (1) Offer; (2) acceptance; (3) mutual commitment or any other value consideration; and (4) skill and ability.