Contracts must be in writing and signed
Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2026 9:24 am
Under British Columbia's Law and Equity Act, specifically Section 59, certain types of contracts must be in writing and signed by the party you are trying to hold liable to be legally enforceable. This is BC's modern equivalent of the traditional Statute of Frauds. If these requirements are not met, the contract is generally not binding.
The rule applies primarily to contracts involving land, such as the sale of real estate, long-term leases, or mortgages. It also applies to guarantees, where one person promises to pay the debt of another if that person defaults. For these specific agreements to stand up in court, the law requires a written document that clearly outlines the essential terms of the deal. Crucially, this document must bear the signature of the person against whom you are trying to enforce the contract. If you try to sue someone to force them to sell their property based on a purely verbal agreement, the court will typically rule that the contract is not binding because it lacks that necessary signature and written proof.
However, the law does include exceptions to prevent people from using this rule to unfairly back out of legitimate agreements. Courts may still enforce an unsigned or verbal contract if there is strong evidence of what is called part performance. This happens when the person seeking to enforce the contract has already taken clear, significant actions based on the agreement, and it would be unfair to let the other party walk away. For example, if a buyer pays a deposit, takes possession of a property, and starts making major renovations with the seller's knowledge, a court might rule the contract is binding even without a signed written document.
In summary, for land transactions and guarantees in British Columbia, a contract is generally not binding unless it is in writing and signed by the person you are holding it against. While the court can make exceptions for fairness when parties have already acted on a verbal deal, having a signed written agreement remains the baseline requirement for legal enforceability.
The rule applies primarily to contracts involving land, such as the sale of real estate, long-term leases, or mortgages. It also applies to guarantees, where one person promises to pay the debt of another if that person defaults. For these specific agreements to stand up in court, the law requires a written document that clearly outlines the essential terms of the deal. Crucially, this document must bear the signature of the person against whom you are trying to enforce the contract. If you try to sue someone to force them to sell their property based on a purely verbal agreement, the court will typically rule that the contract is not binding because it lacks that necessary signature and written proof.
However, the law does include exceptions to prevent people from using this rule to unfairly back out of legitimate agreements. Courts may still enforce an unsigned or verbal contract if there is strong evidence of what is called part performance. This happens when the person seeking to enforce the contract has already taken clear, significant actions based on the agreement, and it would be unfair to let the other party walk away. For example, if a buyer pays a deposit, takes possession of a property, and starts making major renovations with the seller's knowledge, a court might rule the contract is binding even without a signed written document.
In summary, for land transactions and guarantees in British Columbia, a contract is generally not binding unless it is in writing and signed by the person you are holding it against. While the court can make exceptions for fairness when parties have already acted on a verbal deal, having a signed written agreement remains the baseline requirement for legal enforceability.