Business email footers

[jon-]

Those footers everyone seems to be putting in their emails, aka:

generic email footer said:

This message and any attachments ("the message") may contain confidential and/or privileged information for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. Any use not in accordance with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited unless formal approval has been granted. The Firm XXXXXXXXXX declines any liability for any prejudice linked to any incident regarding security, integrity, virus or delay in transmission. Moreover, this message has no contractual or legal value whatsoever; in particular no business transaction can in any way be based exclusively on emails.

Do these actually have any legal weight, or is it just something everyone is now doing because everyone else is?

This post and any attachments ("the post") may contain confidential and/or privileged information for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please avert your eyes from it's beauty and go and have a bath.

[CR0X]

we go more than that including a section about orders and our T&C's.

This in addition to the legislative requirements of the latest Companies House Act which most companies seem to flout.

[Original Poster]

We have something similar, although mainly because everyone else does...

We certainly didn't consult a solicitor about it anyway.

Edited by Original Poster on Friday 17th September 10:15

[CR0X]

we reviewed our T&C recently, and as part of that they advised the Companies House Act and the addition in relation to our T&C. They didn't flag anything up about the standard drivel about virus checking, views of employee etc

[FunkyGibbon]

I went on an e-commerce law course run by Pinsent Masons about 4 years ago* and we were told that these disclaimers were arse-covering bullst with no legal weight whatsoever.

* things may have moved on in 4 years and this could be bks

Edited by FunkyGibbon on Friday 17th September 10:25

[plg]

I'm interested by the "Moreover, this message has no contractual or legal value whatsoever; in particular no business transaction can in any way be based exclusively on emails."

I thought email approval could now recognised as an approval mechanism providing it came from someone that would have reasonable authority?

[Man-At-Arms]

i thought there was a law, whereby you had to put your registered trading address and company registration no. somewhere in the email ?

ETA: thought so, http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/21/new_web_em...

Edited by Man-At-Arms on Friday 17th September 11:32

[therealpigdog]

plg said:

I'm interested by the "Moreover, this message has no contractual or legal value whatsoever; in particular no business transaction can in any way be based exclusively on emails."

I thought email approval could now recognised as an approval mechanism providing it came from someone that would have reasonable authority?

It can be an approval mechanism, unless the emails state expressly that they aren't.

However, if in practice the emails do tend to form contracts, and there is clear evidence that this has been the case, then the clause can be deemed to be ineffective.

[plg]

therealpigdog said:

plg said:

I'm interested by the "Moreover, this message has no contractual or legal value whatsoever; in particular no business transaction can in any way be based exclusively on emails."

I thought email approval could now recognised as an approval mechanism providing it came from someone that would have reasonable authority?

It can be an approval mechanism, unless the emails state expressly that they aren't.

However, if in practice the emails do tend to form contracts, and there is clear evidence that this has been the case, then the clause can be deemed to be ineffective.

That's what I thought - we normally agree in our written contract with clients that variations (+ve or -ve) can be conducted by email by an approved list of people, to certain limits - to avoid "change control" hell with paperwork and approvals. Backed up at the end of each month with statement / variations list with who approved, project, etc as a paper trail.

Works with some clients, doesn't with others. if both parties want to make it work it makes life a lot easier mid project when something changes.

[paddyhasneeds]

I've never quite worked out who the legally "intended recipient" is.

Email isn't like Royal Mail. If you address an envelope to No. 32 and the postie delivers it to No. 23 then I don't think there's much doubt who the "intended recipient" is.

If you address an email to [e-mail] but you meant to address it to [e-mail] then just who is the "intended recipient" legally? The email has gone to exactly who you addressed it to...

So yes, I've always seen them as a load of bks that we (IT people) are forced to add to every email because someone somewhere once got sued.

[Simpo Two]

It adds a certain gravity to e-mails full of tits and bums from Crappington District Council.