Electronic signature technologies are increasingly used to execute documents used in commercial transactions. In this case, the New South Wales Court of Appeal held that a genuine electronic signature affixed to a personal guarantee by an unauthorised (and unknown) individual was ineffective to bind the apparent signatory. The implications of this case may appear concerning because it could be difficult for clients to determine whether a genuine electronic signature was affixed properly (binding) or improperly (non-binding). However, it should be noted that the case concerned a personal guarantee, not a document executed by an individual in their capacity as an officer of a company. Nevertheless, the case stands as a salient reminder to ensure that clients are aware of the nature of the parties with whom they are dealing. More specifically, to ensure that personal guarantees are properly executed by, or with the full knowledge of, the putative signatory.
This case concerned an appeal heard by the Full Court of the Federal Court of a decision by the primary judge in the Federal Circuit Court to dismiss an application for associated discrimination under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) as an abuse of process on the basis that the Appellant had no reasonable prospect of success.