He claimed that when he could not find the identical model on the US HP website he had assumed initially that the laser printer might be obsolete and was therefore being off-loaded cheaply at $66. The following excerpts are particularly relevant: Desmond: 13/01/20 01:17 go hp online now.
[2005] SGCA 2 - eLitigation Registered office: Creative Tower, Fujairah, PO Box 4422, UAE. 15 Early on the morning of 13January 2003 at about 1.17am, the first plaintiff received a message from a friend, Desmond Tan (Desmond), through an Internet chatlink. 129 The careful analysis of case law undertaken by that court yields a cogent and forceful argument that Lord DenningMR was plainly attempting to side-step Bell v Lever in a naked attempt to achieve equitable justice in the face of the poverty of the common law. This short but highly significant e-mail reads: Subject: IMPT HP Colour LaserJet going at only $66!! In such cases, it would be unconscionable to enforce the bargain and equity will set aside the contract, 26 I respectfully agree with the reasoning of ShawJ in. [emphasis added].
Singapore Law Blog 136 First, it was suggested that no contracts had been formed as all the contracts were subject to availability and that a failure to adhere to the directive call to enquire prevented the contracts from coming into existence. While commercial entities ought not to be given a licence to relax their vigilance, the policy considerations in refusing to enforce mistaken agreements militate against attaching undue weight to the carelessness involved in spawning the mistake. In his initial affidavit he admitted wondering whether the price was a mistake after his first order was placed. 87 It appeared to me that the extract from Singapore Civil Procedure 2003 relied on by the plaintiffs was blindly lifted from earlier editions of the English White Book without any consideration as to how it dovetails with the present procedural climate. The defendant, Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd, were an online IT company that sold related software and hardware from Singapore. Ltd.1 has the makings of a student's classic for several reasons: it presents a textbook example of offer and acceptance; it is set in the context of internet contracting; it involves the use in evidence of email, instantaneous messaging, and short messaging system (SMS); and it . The case of Hartog v Colin & Shields [1939] 3All ER 566 is incontrovertibly the leading authority in this area. His girlfriend, Tan Cheng Peng, is also a director and shareholder of the company in which he has a stakeholding with the first and second plaintiffs. 121 While my views here are not central to my decision, the plaintiffs have adverted to this relationship in a misguided attempt to derail the defence on an arid pleading technicality. Having noted all this, I am nevertheless inclined towards the views expressed in the Great Peace Shipping case for the reasons articulated by Lord PhillipsMR.
How do I Locate Case Law?: Case Names & Citations He made Internet search enquiries as to whether the printer model existed and at what price it could be resold. I found their attempts to play down the impact of the statements which they had, to all intents and purposes, willingly and deliberately made earlier, unconvincing. It is postulated by many of the leading treatises that equity has a broad church incorporating a more elastic approach and a court of equity may rescind a contract, award damages or, in limited circumstances, fashion a remedy, to suit the justice of the matter. Failure to do so could also result in calamitous repercussions. With reference to the judgement, the case explores pricing mistakes by online stores. The sixth plaintiff is precluded from asserting his ignorance. Copyright 2003 - 2023 - LawTeacher is a trading name of Business Bliss Consultants FZE, a company registered in United Arab Emirates. The case went before both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. There could be different considerations. CHWEE KIN KEONG v DIGILANDMALL.COM Pte Ltd (2005) SGCA 2. The first plaintiffs purchase took place soon after the ICQ conversation with Desmond where Desmond had in no uncertain terms pitched the price of the laser printer between $3,000 to $4,000. If he was prepared to commit this view in writing to a larger circle of 54 friends and business associates, 47 Not content with making his own purchases, he woke up his brother and transacted 330 units on his behalf. 31 He admitted receiving a call from the first plaintiff at about 2.00am but claimed the first plaintiff merely apprised him of a good deal. This is an area that needs to be rationalised in a coherent and structured manner. A contract will not be concluded unless the parties are agreed as to its material terms. 74 Under product description on each webpage, instead of the actual description of the laser printer which in this case should have been HP9660A Color LaserJet 4600, only the numerals 55 appeared: this was the result of Samuel Teos earlier inadvertent input. 29 The first plaintiff struck me as an opportunistic entrepreneur.
PDF Unilateral Mistake in Contract: Five Degrees of Fusion of Common Lawand Court reference 202 of 2003. The complainants argued that they were not aware that this price was a mistake and wanted the binding contract to be fulfilled. I must add that these were far from being ordinary printers for home use. All previous discussions and negotiations between the parties proceeded on the basis of the price being fixed at so much per piece. Samuel Teo had used all these notional numerals on the training template. However, at the actual hearing of the applications, plaintiffs counsel opposed any amendments whatsoever to the defence and sought leave to withdraw the plaintiffs earlier unilateral amendments. Abstract. Ltd. Yeo Tiong Min* I. case concerning the purchase of laser printers from an online retailer, Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall 76 : To effect the purchase transactions on the respective websites, the plaintiffs had to navigate through several web pages. He also called the first plaintiff to see if the latter had managed to successfully complete his purchase. The terms of the offer are clear and unambiguous and the offeree accepts the offer according to its true sense, Although a mistaken party will not often be able to discharge the onus of showing that the other party, 118 The Canadian courts have been the most active common law courts explicating and developing this area of the law. Two issues had arisen. Having ascertained that the laser printer was being advertised at $66, he decided to undertake further online searches through Yahoo.com and Ebay.com. Soon after, the second, third and fifth plaintiffs took their claims to the media. He worked in an accounting firm, Ernst and Young, for three years. He is currently self-employed and is intimately involved in the multi-level marketing sales of aromatherapy products under the Bel-Air label. Where common mistake is pleaded, the presence of agreement is admitted. This new template was designed to facilitate instantaneous price changes allowing them to be simultaneously reflected in the relevant Internet web pages. 83 The defendant maintained that there was no element of surprise and/or prejudice arising from the amendments. It has been pointed out that the pedigree of these decisions is dubious, to say the least (see [128] and [129] infra). This rationalised the law and gives the court a broad discretion to fashion the applicable relief. A real product number HP9660A was inserted in the new template as the prototype for which fictional prices were to be changed on the three relevant websites. In the Singapore context a similar approach has been adopted by the Court of Appeal in Aircharter World Pte Ltd v Kontena Nasional Bhd [1999] 3 SLR 1 at [30] and [31], and Projection Pte Ltd v The Tai Ping Insurance Co Ltd [2001] 2 SLR 399 at [15]. Date of Verdicts: 12 April 2004, 13 January 2005. The first, second and third plaintiffs have been friends for a long time and are bound by common business interests. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. CHWEE KIN KEONG and Others v DIGILANDMALL.COM Pte Ltd (2004) 2 SLR 594. 58 The fifth plaintiff was first informed by the second plaintiff at about 2.30am about cheap laser printers being available for purchase. It takes the view that there is no jurisdiction in equity to rescind a contract that is valid at common law, on the basis of mistake. They then argue that as equitable defences have not been pleaded, the court has no alternative but to allow the claim. Prejudice is to be viewed broadly to encompass any injustice and embraces both procedural and substantive notions; (d) recognising that while a costs award against the party seeking late amendments can frequently alleviate any inconvenience caused, this may not always be appropriate; (e) taking into account policy considerations that require finality in proceedings and proper time management of the courts resources and scheduling. I find it inconceivable, to say the least, that the fifth plaintiff would have placed an order for 100 laser printers without the conviction that it was in fact a current market model with a real and substantial resale value. His revelation that he did not know if this is an error or whether HP will honour this purchase, not to mention the articulation of his hope that by the time you see this email, the price is still at S$66.00, 27 The first plaintiff obviously took the view that the advertisement should be acted upon urgently. Chwee Kin Keong and Others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd, Whether amendment of particulars of pleadings at conclusion of submissions allowed, Facts raised in proposed amendments addressed during trial and submissions, Whether promise by buyer to pay for goods, in exchange for delivery of goods, constituted sufficient consideration, Electronic Transactions Act (Cap 88, 1999 Rev Ed), Whether automated e-mail responses from seller amounted to acceptance of buyer's offer, Seller's unilateral mistake as to price of goods posted on website, Whether online buyer entitled to enforce contract against seller, 3 All six plaintiffs are graduates, conversant with the usage of the Internet and its practices and endowed with more than an adequate understanding of business and commercial practices. It is asserted that since mistake had not been pleaded as an equitable defence, equity cannot be invoked by the defendant. The payment mode opted for was cash on delivery. Their Consideration was less than executory and non-existent. Mistakes are usually synonymous with the existence of carelessness on the part of the mistaken party. While they did not invariably admit that their searches were made prior to each of the respective transactions, it was plain that they did not tell the whole truth about what they knew, how they knew it and when they knew it. When the defendant learnt of the error, it promptly removed the advertisement from its websites, and informed the plaintiffs as well as 778 others who had placed orders for a total of 4,086 laser printers that the price posting was an unfortunate error, and that it would therefore not be meeting the orders. In addition, each of the confirmatory e-mail responses states at the outset: [W]e will be calling you in the near future to deliver the products to the address shown below. While it is possible that the reporters could have exercised some latitude in penning the reports, they would in essence be conveying, at the very least, summaries and impressions of their interviews with the second, third and fifth plaintiffs. While these contentions were well within the scope of the evidence adduced and their respective lines of cross-examination, they appeared to transgress their respective pleadings. 72 To effect the purchase transactions on the respective websites, the plaintiffs had to navigate through several web pages. It appears there were a series of sms messages between them and at least a few telephone discussions while the purchases were being effected. 144 I find, in the alternative, that the plaintiffs, given each of their backgrounds, would in any event, each have separately realised and appreciated, before placing their purchase orders, that a manifest mistake had occurred even if no communications on the error had taken place between them. There is no question, however, that he placed the orders, that these orders were received by the HP website and that the same automated response sent to the other plaintiffs was sent out to him. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:17 what hp online??
FEATURE - Law Gazette What is urged is that, owing to a common error as to some fundamental fact, the agreement is robbed of all efficacy. 89 In the circumstances, I had little hesitation in allowing the amendments sought by the defendant. It was the defendants computer system. reference was made by the court to "fraud or a very high degree of misconduct" before the non- mistaken party could be . Section11 of the ETA expressly provides that offers and acceptances may be made electronically. Take a look at some weird laws from around the world! In its pleaded case, the defendant asserts that the automated e-mail responses it sent out in the early hours of 13January 2003 did not confirm that stock of the laser printers were available and would be delivered. Inflexible and mechanical rules lead to injustice. Case Summary The financial consequences could be considerable. The terms of the offer are clear and unambiguous and the offeree accepts the offer according to its true sense, but it must have been obvious (and known by the offeree) that the offeror did not intend to make an offer in those terms. COURT. The e-mails sent at 2.34am were also captioned Go load it now! No modern authority was cited to me suggesting an intended commercial transaction of this nature could ever fail for want of consideration. After referring to a series of leading cases, including the often quoted decision of ThomsonJ in McMaster University v Wilchar Construction Ltd (1971), 22DLR(3d) 9 (Ont HCJ), Chief Justice McLachlin said at p37: One circumstance falling clearly within the equitable jurisdiction of the Court to relieve against mistake is that where one party, knowing of the others mistake as to the terms of an offer, remains silent and concludes a contract on the mistaken terms: Solle, supra; Belle River Community Arena v WJC Kaufman Co (1978), 20OR(2d) 447, 4 BLR 231, 87DLR(3d) 761 (CA). There are two types of orders relevant: market orders and limit orders. When notified and satisfied that this transaction was successful as well, he placed a final order at 4.21am for ten laser printers on the HP website, charging this to his credit card. I do not accept that there were no discussions between them on the price posting being an error. He received this information through an sms message. hahaha means S$132, Desmond 13/01/20 01:43 even $500 is a steal. It is plain that the defendant had given careful consideration to this issue and was prepared to contract on the basis that it would be able to comply with any orders hence, there was no reference to any order being subject to stock availability. 70 The third plaintiff proceeded to place orders on behalf of the sixth plaintiff on the HP website. By their own admission, they made Internet searches through various search engines to ascertain the profits they could make. The very foundations of predictability, certainty and efficacy, underpinning contractual dealings, will be undermined if the law and/or equity expands the scope of the mistake exception with alacrity or uncertainty. Counsels approach is flawed. He offered no plausible explanation for the series of orders which he placed while he was in communication with the other plaintiffs, other than stating audaciously that he had to buy a lot to sell a lot, to get a lot. 82 The plaintiffs strenuously opposed the defendants amendments principally on the ground it was made at a late juncture. 155 The Internet has revolutionised commerce and radically altered the manner in which commercial interaction currently takes place. In the absence of proper and full arguments on the issue of which rule is to be preferred, I do not think it is appropriate for me to give any definitive views in these proceedings on this very important issue. Unfortunately, they mistakenly offered the price at so much per pound in place of so much per piece. 138 Effectively, the defendant was attempting in this contention to assert that it could have its cake and eat it as well.
PDF Blips And Blunders: The Law Concerning Mistakes Made In Electronic C {Q V This is essentially a matter of language and intention, objectively ascertained. CISG-online is a research platform dedicated to the law and practice of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods adopted in Vienna on 11 April 1980 (CISG), as well as related areas of international commercial law. Notwithstanding some real differences with posting, it could be argued cogently that the postal rule should apply to e-mail acceptances; in other words, that the acceptance is made the instant the offer is sent. [2005] 1 SLR(R) Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall Pte Ltd 521. whether constructive knowledge by a non-mistaken party of the mistake would suffice to vitiate the contract ab initio. 41 The second plaintiff seems to have redefined the facts to achieve his objective in these proceedings. He was opportunistic in effecting his purchases, active in co-ordinating with the other plaintiffs on the eventful morning, and economical with the truth in his evidence. The knowledge that the offer is not meant according to its literal terms simply displaces the objective theory of contract. Ltd.1 has the makings of a student's classic for several reasons: it presents a textbook . In principle, there is no difference between amending particulars and amending say, a cause of action, defence or any other part of substance in a pleading. Cory had chosen this mode of communication; therefore he Palm tree justice will only serve to inject uncertainty into the law.
Case Note: Singapore - CORE Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] 1 SLR 502: [2005] SGCA 2 Context: This Case deals with the issue of unilateral mistake. I granted leave to both parties to file applications to amend the pleadings. Defence counsel indicated that he wanted to regularise the position on the agency relationship between third and sixth plaintiffs which had been thrashed out during cross-examination; he also wished to plead additional particulars of the respective plaintiffs actual knowledge of or belief in a mistake having occurred, which had emerged both before and during the hearing. Errors may incur wholly unexpected, and sometimes untoward, consequences as these proceedings so amply demonstrate. Needless to say, he could not satisfactorily explain why his previous solicitors had formed such a view when preparing his affidavit and why he had affirmed the same. If this rule applies to international sales, is it sensible to have a different rule for domestic sales? 113 The English Court of Appeal in Commission for the New Towns v Cooper (Great Britain) Ltd [1995] Ch 259, a case of common mistake, imported the concept of Nelsonian knowledge and applied the framework of various categories of knowledge outlined by Peter GibsonJ in Baden v Societe Generale pour Favoriser le Developpement du Commerce et de lIndustrie en FranceSA [1993] 1 WLR 509.
Litigation Singapore Lawyer, Doris Chia - David Lim & Partners LLP Normally, however, the task involves no more than an objective analysis of the words used by the parties. He graduated from NTU as a bachelor of business studies, specialising in financial analysis. The defendant was entitled to stake its entire defence on the basis of common law, though it would have been prudent ex abundanti cautela to have asserted the equitable position in the alternative. Chwee Kin Keong and others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] 1 SLR(R) 502; [2005] SGCA 2. u think this is the 1970s?? After all, what would he do with 100 obsolete commercial laser printers? 134 It is not really in issue that contracts can be effectively concluded over the Internet and that programmed computers sending out automated responses can bind the sender. Mutual promises, by all accounts, on the basis of existing case law, more than amply constitute consideration. This may be too high a price to pay in this area of the law. He has common business interests with the first, third and fourth plaintiffs. The quintessential approach of the law is to preserve rather than to undermine contracts. The text of the e-mail further reinforces the point. The same view is echoed in Halsburys Laws of Singapore vol7 (Butterworths Asia, 2000) at [80.164]. The elements of an offer and acceptance are ex facie satisfied in every transaction asserted in the plaintiffs claims. 137 Furthermore, from the evidence adduced, it became clear that the defendant had intentionally put the words call to enquire instead of, say, the phrase subject to stock availability in an attempt to entice would-be purchasers to place orders with them. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:47 u make me greedy, Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:47 ok lor if you insist . The later the amendment, the greater the adverse consequences. He also participates in multi-level marketing of Bel-Air aromatherapy products. com Pte Ltd30 that was primarily about unilateral mistake. Often the essence of good business is the use of superior knowledge. 7191 RSS High Court Expand/Collapse.
chwee kin keong v digilandmall high court This is without basis. While I agree with what Madam Justice Mclachlin said so far as it goes, I do not believe she intended to imply that there must be a conscious taking advantage by one party of the other in all cases. The fact that the acceptance was automatically generated by a computer software cannot in any manner exonerate the defendant from responsibility. 13 The first plaintiff, Chwee Kin Keong, is 29 years old. Vincent. On any objective construction, the presumed intention must be that in the context of its confirmatory content, the words call to enquire in the availability portion of the contract related to the timing of the delivery rather than being subject to physical availability of the laser printer or stock. 4, 1971, p. 331. [emphasis added]. He is also a director and shareholder in a company engaging in wholesale trade, together with the second and third plaintiffs. It can be noted, however, that while s15 of the ETA appears to be inclined in favour of the receipt rule, commentaries indicate that it is not intended to affect substantive law. The programme trigger on that website automatically and instantaneously initiated the insertion of similar contents onto all three websites. I even went to both the HP Web-Site as well as the DigilandMall Web-site to see if the prices were the same. The amounts ordered and the hurried and hasty manner in which the orders were executed are of cardinal importance. The purpose of the amendments was merely to regularise the pleadings and indeed they went no further than to summarise evidence and submissions that had already been raised. The modern approach in contract law requires very little to find the existence of consideration. It may be impractical and unjust to demand that the mistaken party actually prove the knowledge of a substantial number of people who effect numerous purchases. He also claimed to have talked to buyers in the market about reselling the laser printers and that the failure to procure the units would tarnish his reputation. Yong Pung HowCJ in Tribune Investment Trust Inc v Soosan Trading Co Ltd [2000] 3 SLR 405 at [40] opined: [T]he function of the court is to try as far as practical experience allows, to ensure that the reasonable expectations of honest men are not disappointed. After placing his second order, he admitted making further searches on the Internet to fortify my view that the price of the $66 per printer was not a mistake He was also the only plaintiff who placed an order on the Digilandmall website.
Judgments >> CA Neither party raised any objections.
PDF Woo Kah Wai and another v Chew Ai Hua Sandra and another appeal (c) the need to reach commercially sensible solutions while respecting traditional principles applicable to instances of genuine error or mistake. Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. He was aware that the laser printers were targeted for business use. He offered to buy a laser printer from Desmond at double the price, that is $132. Rules and case law pertaining to amendments are premised upon achieving even-handedness in the context of an adversarial system by: (a) ensuring that the parties apprise each other and the court of the essential facts that they intend to rely on in addressing the issues in controversy or dispute; (b) requiring that an amendment should be attended to in the usual course of events, at an early stage of the proceedings, to ensure that no surprise or prejudice is inflicted on or caused to opposing parties; (c) requiring careful consideration whether any amendments sought at a late stage of the proceedings will cause any prejudice to the opposing party. The credit card payments had not been processed. The defendant even had its terms and conditions posted on its website. This is a disingenuous contention that desperately attempts to palliate their conduct in the subject transactions. The present article analyses the many important issues that are raised by what is probably the first case on Internet mistake - the Singapore High Court decision of Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR 594. Our conclusion is that it is impossible to reconcile Solle v Butcher with Bell v Lever Bros Ltd. Indeed this appears to be the underlying rationale for the unique legal characteristics attributed to an invitation to treat; see Grainger & Son v Gough [1896] AC 325 at 333334, Esso Petroleum Ltd v Commissioners of Customs & Excise [1976] 1All ER 117 at 126.
Counterbalancing Psychology Advantages,
Music City World Series 2022,
Articles C