Given a written “agreement” between a “provider” and a “client”:
- that exists solely as a single PDF file (there is no hardcopy version)
- has a few “sections”, each of which is untitled and un-numbered, basically like paragraphs, albeit on separate pages within the document
- the sections all deal with different aspects of the same overall single dealing/interaction
- has separate places under each “section” where the provider wants the client to electronically sign to acknowledge/agree with the contents of section
- some sections deal with what is being provided, some sections deal with what the client has to pay the provider under certain circumstances
How strongly can it be legally argued that the PDF is a single document, and that signing or not signing the sections should be treated as a single inseparable action?
If so (or even if not so), how strongly can it be argued that signing or not signing of the sections of a later PDF that replaced a previous electronically signed PDF for the same dealing (same document, except with the delivery date moved to a later future date, which in fact was the eventual delivery date) overrides then signing or not signing of all sections that were signed or not signed in the previous PDF?
ie does the second PDF completely replace the first?
This question is asked in the context of enforceability by the provider in both USA and Australia.