Chwee Kin Keong decision - Chwee Kin Keong and Others v Digilandmall Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR 594; - Studocu Caso chwee kin keong and others digilandmall.com pte ltd slr sghc 71 suit no: suit decision 12 apr 2004 date: court: coram: counsel: high court rajah jc tan sok IgnorarExperimenta 'Pergunta a um Especialista' Pergunta a um especialista After hearing their evidence, observing them and considering the submissions made on their behalf, there was no doubt in my mind that they were fully conscious that an unfortunate and egregious mistake had indeed been made by the defendant. They were selling a HP laser printer and an employee accidently made a mistake as to the price of the printer on their website. He claimed that he had not asked her to do the research and that she had done it independently. He claims he then accessed the US HP website either through a Google web search engine or by abbreviating the url of the HP website. 54 The fourth plaintiff admits that he had entertained the idea at the material time that the price posting could have been an error. 90 After leave was granted to amend the defence, each of the plaintiffs filed a further short affidavit refuting knowledge of the mistake relating to pricing. I am not prepared, after full consideration, to assume that the reporters misquoted the facts. Rather, in my opinion, constructive knowledge alone will suffice to invoke equitys conscience. Keywords Contract Online Store Mistake Pricing Mistake Citation This view seems to suggest that principles of equity invariably provide an equally strong but more elastic second string to the bow. So there is a contract and therefore the defendant is liable in breach of contract. But there would have, at least, to be some real reason to suppose the existence of a mistake before it could be incumbent on one party to question whether another party meant what he or she said. What is urged is that, owing to a common error as to some fundamental fact, the agreement is robbed of all efficacy. Just as the Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943 was needed to temper the effect of the common law doctrine of frustration, so there is scope for legislation to give greater flexibility to our law of mistake than the common law allows. See now, also, In such cases, it would be unconscionable to enforce the bargain and equity will set aside the contract. Desmond intimated that the defendant would give vouchers or special deals as a matter of equitable compensation should it not honour the purchase orders. 133 It is however clear that the law should not take cognisance of bad bargains and misapprehension that do not affect a fundamental or essential aspect of a contractual relationship. 86 In cases where the facts raised in the proposed amendments have been addressed during the evidence and submissions and, particularly, where the opposing side has also had an opportunity to address the very same points, there can hardly ever be any real prejudice. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:47 u make me greedy, Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:47 ok lor if you insist . You may find the status of your order by calling us at (phone number given) Special instructions: Please call to advise delivery date and time. 50 Ow Eng Hwee, 29 years old, is another network marketing entrepreneur. The decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in, 25 The law of mistake was discussed in depth by McLachlinCJBC in. 65 He was particularly circumspect in recounting his communications with the second plaintiff. I categorically reject their evidence in so far as it attempts to hermetically compartmentalise their knowledge and discussions. [emphasis added]. The plaintiffs refute that the error exonerates the defendant; they insist that a concluded contract is sacrosanct and must be honoured. As such, I would strongly appeal to you to reconsider your decision. 30th Sep 2021 What amounts to snapping up is a question of degree that will incorporate a spectrum of contextual factors: what is objectively and subjectively known, the magnitude of the transaction(s), the circumstances in which the orders are placed and whether any unusual factors are apparent. 91 There is no real conundrum as to whether contractual principles apply to Internet contracts. The phrase call to enquire, it is contended, was in effect a condition precedent. This was not noticed by the company until over 4,000 printers were ordered. Article24 of the Convention states: For the purposes of this Part of the Convention, an offer, declaration of acceptance or any other indication of intention reaches the addressee when it is made orally to him or delivered by any other means to him personally, to his place of business or mailing address or, if he does not have a place of business or mailing address, to his habitual residence. This assertion is patently untrue. This contention is wholly untenable. 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 credit card payments had not been processed. 85 Having stated the general rule, it is imperative that the rationale underlying this approach be understood. This was also the practice in the trade. If an offeree understands an offer in accordance with its natural meaning and accepts it, the offeror cannot be heard to say that he intended the words of his offer to have a different meaning. VKR a j a hJ C. 27-30 January; 2-6, 9 February; 13 March; 12 April 2004. 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. This may be too high a price to pay in this area of the law. [emphasis added]. http://www.epinions.com/HP_Color_LaserJet_4600_Series_Printer_Printers. He placed his first order for 50 units at about 2.58am, and his second order for another 50 units at 3.22am, again through the HP website. The web merchant, unless he qualifies his offer appropriately, by making it subject to the availability of stock or some other condition precedent, could be seen as making an offer to sell an infinite supply of goods. 75 Each of the automated confirmatory e-mail responses carried under Availability of product the notation call to enquire. It appears that it wanted to leave no stone unturned and had therefore mounted a root and branch attack on the plaintiffs claims. He has incorporated an Internet business Dreamcupid in which the second plaintiff has an interest. The argument is that, despite appearances, there is no real correspondence of offer and acceptance and that therefore the transaction must necessarily be void. , In unilateral mistake, only one of the parties is mistaken. 97 Different rules may apply to e-mail transactions and worldwide web transactions. The price of the laser printer, prior to 3.36pm on 8January 2003, was stipulated as $3,854 (exclusive of GST) on both the Digilandmall and HP websites (the websites), and as $3,448 on the Digiland commerce website. The businessmen saw a great opportunity and grabbed it placing an order for 1,000 printers. 107 As the law now stands, mistakes that are not fundamental or which do not relate to an essential term do not vitiate consent. The fifth plaintiff was also a member of this bridge group. Nor could he satisfactorily explain why he initially made the Internet searches to ensure the offer was genuine. The fifth plaintiff, even if he had not been alerted by the second plaintiff, would have instinctively appreciated the existence of a manifest error without any prompting whatsoever. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd. Case Nos: Suit 202/2003/E (for the first instance), CA/30/2004 (for the appeal) in the High Court of Singapore (at first instance), Singapore Court of Appeal. The Canadian and Australian cases have moved along with the eddies of unconscionability. 2 [2004] 2 SLR 594 ("the Digilandmall case") (The decision was very recently affirmed by the Singapore Court of Appeal in Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] SGCA 2, albeit on somewhat different grounds and where the focus was on the law of unilateral mistake rather than formation of contract.)]. This is an area that needs to be rationalised in a coherent and structured manner. Do you have a 2:1 degree or higher? 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. Certainly, none of them had ever been induced to conduct transactions on such a scale on the Internet for any product, let alone sophisticated commercial laser printers. In a physical sale, the merchant can immediately turn down an offer to purchase a product that has been advertised; otherwise he may be inundated with offers he cannot justify. Neither party raised any objections. The Instantaneous Transmission of Acceptances. Because it was simply a matter of time before the error would inevitably be noticed and the pricing inevitably corrected. In-house law team, Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] 1 SLR(R) 502, Contract unilateral mistake Internet Contract Consensus ad Idem Meeting of the Minds Acceptance Offer Void Error. 33 See the Singapore Court of Appeal decision of Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd[2005] 1 SLR 502 (noted by Yeo, TM ' Great Peace: a distant disturbance ' (2005) 121 Law Quarterly Review 393 Google Scholar; KFK Low 'Unilateral mistake at common law and in equity' [2005] Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly 423; and PW . Mistakes are usually synonymous with the existence of carelessness on the part of the mistaken party. 83 The defendant maintained that there was no element of surprise and/or prejudice arising from the amendments. Daniel was previously a partner and head of the technology practice at Messrs Rajah & Tann. It is, in large measure, determined by making an objective appraisal of the exchanges between the parties. 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. The evidence incontrovertibly indicates that the first plaintiff himself entertained this view for the entire period he was in communication with the second and third plaintiffs. Cory had chosen this mode of communication; therefore he In terms of chronological sequence, the initial page accessed was the shopping cart, followed by checkout-order . Their reference to arbitraging was a nebulous fig leaf designed to legitimise their conduct in a cloak of legal and commercial respectability. Arrival can also be immaterial unless a recipient accesses the e-mail, but in this respect e-mail does not really differ from mail that has to be opened. 112 Phang ([106] supra, at 418) rightly observes: It must be stressed that, in this context, a man is taken to have known what would have been obvious to a reasonable person in the light of the surrounding circumstances. Yet in other aspects, he could recollect, with crystal clear precision and clarity, details of what had transpired. 145 If the price of a product is so absurdly low in relation to its known market value, it stands to reason that a reasonable man would harbour a real suspicion that the price may not be correct or that there may be some troubling underlying basis for such a pricing. From time to time they communicate with each other, 4 The defendant is a company that sells information technology (IT) related products over the Internet to consumers. In Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd, the English Court of Appeal decided that Solle v Butcher was wrong to hold that there was an equitable doctrine of common mistakes. Notwithstanding, the defendant does not take issue with this as the sixth plaintiffs orders were received and the appropriate automated responses generated. It is an important subject for the future development of English contract law. It is important not to force into a Procrustean bed principles that have to be modified or discarded when considering novel aspects of the Internet. 120 The widening of jurisdiction to embrace a broad equitable jurisdiction could well encourage litigious behaviour and promote uncertainty. Following closely to the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong & Others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR 594 as a precedent with similar context, the court would most likely try to determine if there is an existence of a contract or if an agreement has been reached in the first place, so we refer to Lord Phillips in Shogun Finance Ltd v . In this case, there was no consensus ad idem or meeting of the minds between the parties, which meant that there could be no binding contract between them. How come got such thing? The notation in the checkout-order confirmation further confirmed that the defendants concern was with the delivery time rather than with qualifying its obligation by reference to stock availability as a condition precedent. In accordance with s15(1) of the ETA, acceptance would be effective the moment the offer enters that node of the network outside the control of the originator. Slade, in a well reasoned article written not long after, 128 The most significant judicial pronouncement supporting this view emanates from the recent English Court of Appeal in, Thus the premise of the equitys intrusion into the effects of the common law is that the common law rule in question is seen in the particular case to work injustice, and for some reason the common law cannot cure itself. Parties Chwee Kin Keong & Others v. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd. Decision date 12/04/2004. There are in this connection two schools of thought. I drew counsels attention to Halsburys Laws of Australia (Butterworths, 1992), vol6 at para 110-5550 which states: A particular class of case which illustrates unilateral mistake as to the terms intended, known to the other party, is that in which an offer which would be very advantageous to the offeree is snapped up by the offeree. There is no doubt that the plaintiffs acted with indecent haste in the dead of the night in placing as many orders as each of them felt their financial resources credibly permitted them to do. chwee kin keong and others digilandmall.com pte ltd sghc 71 case number suit decision date 12 april 2004 high court coram rajah jc counsel name(s) tan sok ling Skip to document Ask an Expert Sign inRegister Sign inRegister Home Ask an ExpertNew My Library Discovery Institutions Republic Polytechnic London School of Business and Finance 18 He said he later conducted some searches using the Google search engine and ascertained that the laser printer could be sold at about US$1,300 in certain markets. The most that the court can do in these circumstances is to refuse E [the other party, who wants the contract held void] specific performance, which lies in the discretion of the court and will probably be refused where E has been guilty of some degree of sharp practice. This is in contrast to the English position where after several decades Hartog v Colin & Shields still remains the locus classicus. 19 Later in the morning, at about 4.15am, the fourth plaintiff sent the following e-mail to the first plaintiff, copied to the second plaintiff only: Subject: Re: IMPT HP Colour LaserJet going at only $66!! June Proctor, 1997, p. 13. In my view this further undermines the essence of the plaintiffs case that they never contemplated that the pricing was a mistake. 156 The plaintiffs claims are dismissed. Prior to this he was an associate in the Intellectual Property and Technology Department of Allen & Gledhill. Rather they assist in explaining how the common law has incrementally and cautiously allowed and continues to mould exceptions to the application of the objective theory of contracts. There was a promise to pay made by the plaintiffs in exchange for the delivery of the requisite laser printers. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:42 I want at least one for personal use 2 would be good coz my gf needs one too any more than that would be a bonus ;-), Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:43 anyway, I dont mind buying over if you have frens who want to sell buy at twice the price!! 42 Mark Yeow Kinn Keong has a Bachelor of Science (Economics) degree from the University of London. 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. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. They were selling a HP laser printer and an employee accidently made a mistake as to the price of the printer on their website.. Cases There is no merit at all in this contention. There must be consensus ad idem. This is essentially a matter of language and intention, objectively ascertained. 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. Having ascertained that the laser printer was being advertised at $66, he decided to undertake further online searches through Yahoo.com and Ebay.com. China-Singapore "One Belt One Road" International Business Cases Digest Part 1 -"" () 457-463 (2020, published by the Singapore and People's Republic of China Supreme Courts . Even if it were to be held that there is now a general test of unconscionability applicable to all types of mistake, the plaintiffs contentions will not take them far. There cannot be any legitimate expectation of enforcement on the part of the non-mistaken party seeking to take advantage of appearances. The Canadian and Australian cases have moved along with the eddies of unconscionability. The plaintiffs are, however, entitled to the cost of the amendments, in any event, which I fix at $1,000. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:24 just ordered 3 colour lazer printer for S$66.00 each. Certainty in commercial transactions should not be trifled with, as this will inevitably affect how commercial and business exchanges are respected and effected. When, however, the cases provoked by these factual situations are analysed, they will be seen to fall, not into three, but only two distinct legal categories. The answer on the authorities is a mistake by one party of which the other knew or ought reasonably to have known. It appears that in Convention transactions, the receipt rule applies unless there is a contrary intention. Two issues had arisen. 24 While the first plaintiff conceded that he had communicated to the second and third plaintiffs the existence of a good deal, he maintained he did not discuss the possibility of the pricing being a mistake. E-mails are processed through servers, routers and Internet service providers. Has an agreement been reached or not? Rules of court which are meant to facilitate the conduct of proceedings invariably encapsulate concepts of procedural fairplay.
Sevier County Tn Human Resources,
Inputs And Outputs Of Glycolysis Quizlet,
Articles C