Under French law, Section One of the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act of 1981 stipulates that a person can be convicted of forgery if he makes an incorrect instrument, with the intention that he or any other person will use it to convince another person that he or she is real. This may lead to the person accepting the instrument (in this case a backdated document) doing something or not if the instrument is considered authentic. The $1 million sola change that I am preparing for this client to deliver to his benefactor, the actual date the funds were wired, was legal. It was created to document or commemorate an earlier oral agreement on the repayment of funds. Sometimes a document has to be backdated to make it correct. Suppose a creditor starts delivering his product under a proposed contract to determine later that the customer never signed the contract. In this case, the insertion of the date on which the parties started the performance under the contract is more precise than the date of signature to be inserted. There are a few ways in which the lawyer can give himself some protection if he accepts such a request, but they are not infallible. If a document is to be reissued for the registration of a previous oral agreement. B, however, must be drafted in such a way as not to give the mistaken impression that it was actually signed on the date indicated. The best way to do this is to openly state in the document that it records an earlier oral agreement on a given date and does so from that date and dates to the actual date on which it was signed.
The position is then clear to all those who then look at the document. Another possibility is to indicate, at the beginning of the document, that it is established “from” the required date. However, the actual date of the signature should be set at the end of the certification clause in order to avoid any allegation that the document was deliberately misleading. Even these methods of “retrodatation” of a document should not be used, even if there was no previous agreement and the document is merely an attempt to give the mistaken impression that something happened earlier than it was. Indeed, even if a specific date is set, it does not protect counsel from involvement in a criminal offence if the purpose of the return is indeed to deceive or mislead the helmsman, regulator or even any other person, and counsel knew or should have known that this was the case. CONSIDERING that the parties now wish to conclude this contract, which dates from 15 July 2018, referring to the oral agreement of the parties and taking into account the additional conditions provided by the proposal; From a legal point of view, a contract should normally only be backdated if: as you can see, the issue of retrodation can be controversial. It is not straight and can cause problems for any lawyer who agrees to put a document back together, even if he specifies in the document that it is backdated, because he must ensure that the document is retrodated and that it is done for a legitimate reason. Therefore, if in doubt, it is preferable to say “no” or, if necessary, to seek external legal advice. The difficult question a lawyer must answer is to what extent he must inquire about the accuracy of his client`s statement that the document “only records a previous agreement”? Should he check whether this was indeed the case, or can he adopt an ostrich position and do the ostrich and not ask questions? Does the lawyer have an obligation to at least make reasonable efforts to confirm that he or she is being told the truth? Unfortunately, there is no simple or linear answer, and this depends on the ease with which the lawyer will defend his position by agreeing to forward the document if his judgment was wrong and if the authorities challenge the document, possibly in a criminal complaint against the client.