Placing an advertisement on the Internet is essentially advertising or holding out to the world at large. 152 This view has also found support in the Singapore context. Ltd} has the makings of a student's classic for several rea sons: it presents a textbook example of offer and acceptance; it is set in the context 37 The second plaintiff was insistent in his evidence that there was no communication from the first plaintiff alerting him to the likely existence of the mistake; he contends the first plaintiff merely apprised him of a good deal and sent him the weblink to the HP website. The element of constructive knowledge based upon what a reasonable person ought to know is premised upon that person not being conscious of the error. He then carried out some checks on the Yahoo search engine to ascertain whether the printer model existed and whether the laser printer could be sold at more than $66. Chwee Kin Keong and others v. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd. [2004] SGHC 71. Established common law principles, in the arena of mistake, ought not be trifled with unless they are so obviously anachronistic and ill-suited to commercial and legal pragmatism. [emphasis added]. 80 Upon the conclusion of submissions, I directed counsel to appear before me. 25 The mass e-mail at 2.58am is cursorily dismissed by counsel for the plaintiffs as poor use of language that ought not to be taken literally in light of the early hours of the morning. Neither party raised any objections. Having ascertained that the laser printer was being advertised at $66, he decided to undertake further online searches through Yahoo.com and Ebay.com. 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. Chwee Kin Keong and Others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] SGCA 2 Civil Procedure - Costs - Principles - Respondent failing in every aspect of defence except on issue of unilateral mistake - Trial judge awarding full costs to respondent - Whether respondent entitled to full costs The contract was held to be void because there was no consensus on the terms. 116 The term snapping up was aptly coined by JamesLJ in Tamplin v James (1880) 15ChD 215 at 221. If the defendant were right, they maintain, uncertainty would prevail in the commercial world and more particularly in Internet transactions. Consideration was less than executory and non-existent. 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. 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. 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!! It deals with the process rather than the substance of how to divine the rule. 47 Not content with making his own purchases, he woke up his brother and transacted 330 units on his behalf. A court is not likely to take a sympathetic view of such manner of amendment. 9 The defendants assertion that Samuel Teo had neither the authority nor the intention to make any alterations to the laser printers price is now accepted by the plaintiffs. Furthermore, they relied on a passage from Singapore Civil Procedure 2003 (Sweet & Maxwell Asia, 2003) at para20/8/47 that asserts: At the trial leave to amend particulars will as a rule be refused (Moss v Malings (1886) 83ChD 603). The fourth plaintiff duly accessed the e-mail the second plaintiff had sent him pursuant to their conversation. 124 A number of decisions over the last five decades emanating from several common law jurisdictions even go so far as to suggest that with the integration of the courts of common law and equity, equitable principles now hold sway and that earlier common law decisions need reinterpretation. The issue in this case was whether the pricing was a mistake and if the contract would be fulfilled. 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, 149 It is clear from the authorities reviewed that such a contract, if entered into by a party with actual or presumed knowledge of an error, is void from the outset. His Internet research alone would have confirmed that. A party may not snap at an obviously mistaken offer: McMaster. 132 It can be seen from this brief excursus into the law of mistake that this is an abstruse area. 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. 7 At about 3.36pm, Samuel Teo, an employee of DIL, inadvertently uploaded the contents of the training template onto the Digiland commerce website operated by DIL, in place of the test website allocated for the training. 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. The plaintiffs could not coherently explain why neither they nor their lawyers had not attempted to correct the press reports at the material juncture. Where common mistake is pleaded, the presence of agreement is admitted. Having ascertained the true market price, it would have appeared crystal clear, given the huge disparity in the pricing, that a manifest mistake had occurred. Delivery was merely a timing issue. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:43 yeah man whats the original price? Who bears the risk of such mistakes? 1.47K subscribers Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] Facts The defendant, Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd, were an online IT company that sold related software and hardware from. It appears that it wanted to leave no stone unturned and had therefore mounted a root and branch attack on the plaintiffs claims. It is not in dispute that the defendant made a genuine error. I have found that the plaintiffs had at all material times knowledge of or, at the very least, a real belief that an error had been made by the defendant in the price posting. Clout issue 43. 61 The fifth plaintiff placed an order for 100 laser printers at about 3.51am. 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. In submissions, his counsel attempted to play down the significance of both this conversation as well as the mass e-mail. Before retiring for the night, the first plaintiff had a further discussion with the second plaintiff on how to store the laser printers they had ordered. Please refer to the PDF copy for a print-friendly version. There were no such discussions with potential buyers. Loose language may result in inadvertently establishing contractual liability to a much wider range of purchasers than resources permit. Though both of them admit to having had discussions about the website terms and conditions governing the purchases, they deny that there was any discussion between them on even the possibility of an error having taken place. All previous discussions and negotiations between the parties proceeded on the basis of the price being fixed at so much per piece. 122 For now it appears that a mistaken party can have two bites at the cherry. In doing so, they appear to have also conflated equitable and common law concepts. Evidence was given that if phone calls were indeed placed, they would from time to time limit the number of sales. He claims visiting, inter alia, the Epinions and Hardwarezone websites, and though it appears that there was at the material time a discussion thread on the error on the Hardwarezone website, the fourth plaintiff denied having seen this. They deny having had any communications amongst themselves about the possibility, let alone probability, that the price posting on the website could have been a mistake. I do not know if this is an error or whether HP will honour this purchase. 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. 78 In a Channel NewsAsia report datelined 15January 2003, it was reported that: Two of the customers, Mark Yeow and Malcolm Tan, have already spoken to their lawyers. Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corp. [1955] 2 Q.B. 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 142 The plaintiffs were bound by personal relationships as well as past and present common commercial interests. Certain Internet service providers provide the technology to inform a sender that a message has not been properly routed. This is an online dating and match-making service. 88 The fact that the amending party has been tardy or even negligent is a factor that a court can (and in some egregious cases, should) take into account but this is by no means a decisive factor (cf Ketteman v Hansel Properties). 130 It can be persuasively argued that given (a)the historical pedigree of the cases, (b)the dictates of certainty and predictability in the business community and (c)the general acceptance of the existence of distinct common law rules, it is preferable not to conflate these concepts. This provision acknowledges that the essential framework of an electronic contract needs to be considered in the usual manner; in other words, principles of contract formation, consideration, terms and conditions, choice of law and jurisdictional issues need to be examined. A number of them have very close relationships, with some of them even sharing common business interests. Sometimes this is made explicit by judges; more often it is the implied basis of the courts decision. A typical but not essential defining characteristic of conduct of this nature is the haste or urgency with which the non-mistaken party seeks to conclude a contract; the haste is induced by a latent anxiety that the mistaken party may learn of the error and as a result correct the error or change its mind about entering into the contract. The jurisdiction asserted in the former case has not developed. He is also part of the Bel-Air network. 49 Tan Cheng Pengs brief evidence did not really assist the third plaintiff. He too affirmed from his searches that the normal price of the laser printer was in the region of US$2,000. 77 Soon after the defendant informed the plaintiffs that they did not intend to deliver the laser printers, the plaintiffs took their claims to the press. Looking for a flexible role? The recipients of this e-mail included the second, fourth, fifth plaintiffs and Tan Cheng Peng, the third plaintiffs girlfriend. Quoine was operating as a market-maker on their own platform. The Instantaneous Transmission of Acceptances. Plaintiffs counsel indicated that they wanted to further particularise the sixth plaintiffs purchase orders. Where either mutual or unilateral mistake is pleaded, the very existence of agreement is denied. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. Ltd.1 has the makings of a student's classic for several rea- Mistakes that negative consent do not inexorably result in contracts being declared void. 327. Lord Phillips of Worth MatraversMR observed in a withering analysis at [156], [157], [160] and [161]: 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. He graduated from NTU as a bachelor of business studies, specialising in financial analysis. Case law Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmallcom Pte Ltd suggests that General Rule. 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. If coherence is to be restored to this area of our law, it can only be by declaring that there is no jurisdiction to grant rescission of a contract on the ground of common mistake where that contract is valid and enforceable on ordinary principles of contract law. This is one of the first prominent case that deals with the issue of web based contract. 21 The first plaintiff must have realised at the outset that he would have to explain with a certain measure of credibility the purport and significance of all his Internet communications between 1.00am and 3.00am on 13January 2003. The defendant programmed the software. This was presumably to render the training more lifelike. The court has to be astute and adopt a pragmatic and judicious stance in resolving such issues. The elements of an offer and acceptance are ex facie satisfied in every transaction asserted in the plaintiffs claims. 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. The preface I do not know in no way detracts from this; the e-mail being addressed to a large group of 54 persons, the first plaintiff would simply not have wanted to commit himself by saying I know. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:24 just ordered 3 colour lazer printer for S$66.00 each. This short but highly significant e-mail reads: Subject: IMPT HP Colour LaserJet going at only $66!! Do you have a 2:1 degree or higher? 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. 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. Certainty in commercial transactions should not be trifled with, as this will inevitably affect how commercial and business exchanges are respected and effected. This gives their courts a broad and elastic jurisdiction to deal with commercially inappropriate behaviour. (See for example the approach in Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1990] 1AllER 512.) Thus, 119 It is apparent from this overview that the Canadian courts have integrated through their equitable jurisdiction the concept of common law mistake within the rubric of unconscionability. 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. Copyright 2003 - 2023 - LawTeacher is a trading name of Business Bliss Consultants FZE, a company registered in United Arab Emirates. 75 Each of the automated confirmatory e-mail responses carried under Availability of product the notation call to enquire. The rationale for this is that a court will not sanction a contract where there is no, 150 The plaintiffs have contended that this court ought to follow the decision in, A thread runs through our contract law that effect must be given to, 152 This view has also found support in the Singapore context. 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. In light of these general observations, I now address the law on unilateral mistake. After the defendant intimated that it would not be delivering the laser printer, he sent an e-mail excoriating it, asserting, inter alia: Myself, and other people who have been disappointed by you decision, will definitely spread word of the companys lack of honour and integrity to everyone we know and all over the internet! 26 It is clear from the priority status accorded to the e-mail that the first plaintiff was sharing his knowledge of a good deal. In terms of chronological sequence, the initial page accessed was the shopping cart, followed by checkout-order particulars, checkout-order confirmation, check-out payment details and payment whether by cash on delivery or by credit card. Prior to being self-employed, he was a corporate banker with Standard Chartered Bank, Singapore, for four years. He appeared to be consummately familiar with Internet practices and was forced to concede that he thought it was weird and unusual when he saw the number 55 on the relevant webpages in place of the actual product description. 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. At 4.16am he placed another order for one laser printer, by credit card, on the HP website. This was borne out by the case of Chwee Kin Keong and Others v. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] SGHC 71 where an autogenerated email with "Successful Purchase Confirmation" in its subject . He is also a director and shareholder in a company engaging in wholesale trade, together with the second and third plaintiffs. (See for example the approach in, 142 The plaintiffs were bound by personal relationships as well as past and present common commercial interests. There must be consensus ad idem. It is not in dispute that the defendant made a genuine error. Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. The payment mode opted for was cash on delivery. He appeared distinctly uncomfortable during several phases of his cross-examination and his answers on crucial points were evasive and often vague.. His evidence in relation to the level and nature of communications he had with the second and third plaintiffs on the morning in question lacked candour. 66 The fifth plaintiff also gave evidence that the next morning, when he logged on his computer, he noted that a Hong Kong lawyer friend, Coral Toh, was also logged onto her computer. Court name Singapore High Court. If this rule applies to international sales, is it sensible to have a different rule for domestic sales?

Women's Western Wear Catalog, Articles C