A signed agreement is a signature on a piece of paper and is a powerful piece of legal evidence between two parties. Read 3 min It can be a healthy misunderstanding, as proof that the parties have reached a consensus in an oral agreement or written agreement that has not been signed can be a difficult undertaking. One of the indicators that can be used to demonstrate the existence of an agreement under the control of our courts is the conduct of the parties. In Cell C (Pty) Ltd/Zulu 2008 (1) SA 451 (SCA), Cell C entered into an agreement with Zulu for Cell C Zulu to provide a community service container equipped with telephones and other equipment. Cell C would also provide the container with a mobile phone signal to enable Zulu to operate a telecommunications service. Cell C gave Zulu its standard contract, which was later signed by Zulu, but was not returned to Cell C. Before Zulu signed, he had paid some money to Cell C, and then, after Zulu signed (but not Cell C), Cell C delivered a container of phones and equipment to Zulu. This may seem like a base (and that`s it!), but you`d be surprised how often it goes into the hustle and bustle of progressing with business. Although you wouldn`t necessarily have to sign an agreement to make it valid, why would you want to take that opportunity? There is absolutely no better way to prove that a party intended to be bound by a contract, and then whipping it and indicating its signature on the document. If the parties to a contract may not sign it at the same time, you may want to consider adding a section to the contract, unless the contract is legally binding, unless it is signed by both parties. Be sure to register the purchase and sale of a real estate contract in the real estate records of the jurisdiction in which the property is located. The best way to do this is to include changes in the version of the contract. This will help ensure that there is no misunderstanding about what the parties wanted to sign.
However, if it is not possible to revise and reprint a contract before it is signed, make sure that any changes made by the contract are initiated by each party. As strong as an indicator may be, signing an agreement is only one of many indicators that can serve as evidence of an agreement between the parties. It is these alternative indicators that become relevant to the contracting parties when, in the hectic circumstances of trade, the legal administration (signing documents) takes second place in the name of the execution of operations. The Tribunal found that the parties had entered into an “intermediate agreement” through their respective services (payment by Zulu and delivery by cell C) which would be replaced only by the written agreement signed by both parties. Cell C therefore had no right to terminate the contract immediately, as it had not adequately terminated zulu, i.e. the deadline for contracts that do not provide for termination deadlines. Parties do not necessarily have to sign the same copy of the contract for it to be binding. If the parties sign different copies of the contract, they must agree that each of their signature pages constitutes a complete agreement executed. For this reason, contracts often contain a provision stating that “the parties can perform this contract in return, each being considered original, and all are only an agreement.” Applying these principles to the facts of the Zulu case, it could be argued that, since Zulu signed the contract submitted to it by Cell C, the parties reached a consensus when Cell C did not sign the contract because it is absurd to think that Cell C should not be bound by a contract for which it was solely responsible and, in fact, Cell C included “standard” conditions in which it always contracted in the types of business.