The essence is not so much in the nature of the amendment but rather in the consequences flowing from any amendment to the pleadings. 128 The most significant judicial pronouncement supporting this view emanates from the recent English Court of Appeal in Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd [2003] QB 679, a case of common mistake. After the defendant intimated that it would not be delivering the laser printer, he sent an e-mail excoriating it, asserting, I felt that I had done all that was conceivably within my means to ensure that the Price was. 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. If the defendant were right, they maintain, uncertainty would prevail in the commercial world and more particularly in Internet transactions. 156 The plaintiffs claims are dismissed. Furthermore, unlike a fax or a telephone call, it is not instantaneous. This is an inane argument. This judgment text has undergone conversion so that it is mobile and web-friendly. 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). 107 As the law now stands, mistakes that are not fundamental or which do not relate to an essential term do not vitiate consent. chwee kin keong v digilandmall high court As a matter of fairness, allowing amendments at a late stage should usually go hand in hand with granting leave to the other party to adduce further evidence, if necessary. 99 Like the somewhat arbitrary selection of the postal rule for ordinary mail, in the ultimate analysis, a default rule should be implemented for certainty, while accepting that such a rule should be applied flexibly to minimise unjustness. Court Judgement 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 Skip to document Ask an Expert Sign inRegister Sign inRegister Home Ask an ExpertNew My Library Discovery Institutions London School of Business and Finance SAA Global Education 70 The third plaintiff proceeded to place orders on behalf of the sixth plaintiff on the HP website. 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. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd,( [2005]SGCA 2 ) . This is clearly a mistake as they could not possible be sold for an amount that in a commercial situation. Altogether he sought to purchase 760 units, the largest number of orders placed by anyone between 8 and 13January 2003. "Unilateral Mistake in Law and Equity: Solle v Butcher Reinstated" by 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. Ltd. Yeo Tiong Min* I. 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. No cash had been collected. 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. 27 The first plaintiff obviously took the view that the advertisement should be acted upon urgently. 39 The sequence of orders placed by the second plaintiff in the short space of an hour and a half deserves some mention. 16 When the first plaintiff eventually succeeded in accessing the HP website, he immediately placed an order for 100 laser printers at about 2.05am, charging the transaction to his credit card. Unilateral Mistake in Contract: Five Degrees of Fusion of - Jstor 49 Tan Cheng Pengs brief evidence did not really assist the third plaintiff. In Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd ,1 one of the defendant's employees mistakenly uploaded the contents of a training template onto the defendant's website, resulting in the retail price of S$3,854 for a commercial laser printer on the website being replaced with the figure S$66. Before dealing with the point of real substance, it is appropriate to briefly deal with two of the less meritorious contentions advanced. It stands to reason that if a party shuts its eyes to the obvious, the party is being neither honest nor reasonable, and ought to be affixed with knowledge. 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. Quoine Pte Ltd v B2C2 Ltd: A Commentary - SSRN 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. 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. Part of the training module included hands-on training with a new template for a Price Mass Upload function. The Vienna Sales Convention (the Convention) applies in Singapore as a consequence of the Sale of Goods (United Nations Convention) Act (Cap283A, 1996Rev Ed). There is no merit at all in this contention. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. Case Note: Singapore - CORE 29 The first plaintiff struck me as an opportunistic entrepreneur. Copyright 2003 - 2023 - LawTeacher is a trading name of Business Bliss Consultants FZE, a company registered in United Arab Emirates. In Associated Japanese Bank (International) Ltd v Credit du NordSA [1989] 1 WLR 255 at 266, Lord DenningMRs views were doubted and described as reflecting an individual opinion by SteynJ (as he then was). Slade, in a well reasoned article written not long after Solle v Butcher was decided, asserted: In general, it is submitted that there are no cases which support the proposition that in cases of unilateral mistake, V [the enforcing party] may obtain this relief where the contract is not void at law and there has been no misrepresentation. 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. It has been a fertile source of academic debate, but in practice it has given rise to a handful of cases that have merely emphasised the confusion of this area of our jurisprudence. There are persuasive arguments against extending the litmus test of unconscionability to all mistake-type situations. [2006] SGHC 222 - eLitigation The CISG has currently been adopted by 95 Contracting States world-wide. The knowledge that the offer is not meant according to its literal terms simply displaces the objective theory of contract. Being fully conscious of the pivotal nature of this point, I have duly accorded particular attention to the evidence and credibility of each of the plaintiffs. 50 Ow Eng Hwee, 29 years old, is another network marketing entrepreneur. 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. 94 Historically, the common law has recognised an anomaly in the contractual features pertaining to a display of goods for sale. The recipients of this e-mail included the second, fourth, fifth plaintiffs and Tan Cheng Peng, the third plaintiffs girlfriend. The same view is echoed in Halsburys Laws of Singapore vol7 (Butterworths Asia, 2000) at [80.164]. COOTE, B. Though the actual price of the laser printer was $3,854, the defendant had on 8January 2003 mistakenly posted the price at $66.00 on its websites. [emphasis added]. But it is difficult to see how that can apply here. 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. Indeed he had conduct of significant phases of these proceedings on behalf of the plaintiffs. It appears that in Convention transactions, the receipt rule applies unless there is a contrary intention. 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. He sought to amend his affidavit and testified that if the references in his affidavit implied the acknowledgement of a mistake, they were formulated not by him but by his previous solicitors and were incorrect. In a Straits Times report dated 15January 2003 captioned $66 printer error angry customers seek lawyers help, it was reported that the second plaintiff, described as a network marketer had on 13January at about 2.00am stumbled upon a offer he could not believe $66 for a Hewlett Packard laserjet printer that normally sells for $3,854 before GST. It is not in dispute that the defendant made a genuine error. In New Zealand, the legislature enacted the Contractual Mistake Act 1977. 12 The plaintiffs both collectively and individually maintained adamantly that while they thought that the price of $66 appeared to be a good deal they did not think that the website prices had been mistakenly placed or inserted. The unconstrained exchange that followed between the two is both revealing and compelling. Therefore, administrative law encompasses Is the Right to Privacy Adequately Protected? 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. The court has to be astute and adopt a pragmatic and judicious stance in resolving such issues. 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. The complainants had ordered over 100 printers each at this price. In Chwee Kin Keong v . 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. Both parties expressed that they wished to effect amendments to mirror evidence that had been adduced in the proceedings. 154 Interestingly, of the 784 persons who placed 1,008 orders for 4,086 laser printers, only these six plaintiffs have attempted to enforce their purported contractual rights. Having expressed my views on consideration, I should also add for good measure that, in any event, there is ample consideration. In addition to the law of (especially, unilateral) mistake, issues relating to the formation of a contract will be considered (including the law relating to offer and . This price was much lower than the actual retail price, and had been posted on the defendant's website by mistake. 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. The rationale for this is that a court will not sanction a contract where there is no consensus ad idem and furthermore it will not allow, as in the case of unilateral mistake, a non-mistaken party to take advantage of an error which he is or ought to be conscious of. 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 Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd. The point is, there is a chasm between a clarification amendment and a new or distinct issue being raised at a later stage. He received this information through an sms message. In these proceedings, it appears that the purchases made by the sixth plaintiff were not accompanied by a corresponding receipt of acceptances, as his e-mail inbox was full. He commenced practice in 2000 and currently practices with the law firm representing the plaintiffs in this action. From time to time there will be cases where this is an overriding consideration. COURT. 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 When pressed as to whether he visited other websites, he said he could not confirm that one way or the other. If stock of a product has been exhausted, a prospective purchaser cannot sue for specific performance or damages as he has merely made an offer that has not been accepted by the merchant. 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. 85 Having stated the general rule, it is imperative that the rationale underlying this approach be understood. No rights can pass to third parties. I do not accept that there were no discussions between them on the price posting being an error. There is no larger noble principle, such as the sanctity of contracts, to be observed or protected in these proceedings. He opted to pay for all his purchases by cash on delivery. 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. This case is a paradigm example of an error on the human side. This is in contrast to the English position where after several decades, 125 The principal source of this view has been Lord DenningMR. 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. Yet in other aspects, he could recollect, with crystal clear precision and clarity, details of what had transpired. Transactions over websites are almost invariably instantaneous and/or interactive. 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. The defendant, on the other hand, contends that the law should not penalise a party who has unwittingly and genuinely made a unilateral mistake which was known or ought to have been known by the plaintiffs. This is in contrast to the English position where after several decades Hartog v Colin & Shields still remains the locus classicus. Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. Mutual promises, by all accounts, on the basis of existing case law, more than amply constitute consideration. There are many different shades of sharp practice or impropriety. I note that Chitty at para5-089, fn25 sagely opines that Taylor v Johnson does not represent English law, at least, where the other party knows that a mistake has been made. It is not in dispute that the defendant made a genuine error. Web merchants ought to ensure that they either contract out of the receipt rule or expressly insert salient terms within the contract to deal with issues such as a choice of law, jurisdiction and other essential terms relating to the passing of risk and payment. 57 Malcolm Tan is 30 years old and a practising advocate and solicitor. Application of such a rule may however result in contracts being formed outside the jurisdiction if not properly drafted. I even went to both the HP Web-Site as well as the DigilandMall Web-site to see if the prices were the same. Such errors can be magnified almost instantaneously and may be harder to detect than if made in a face to face transaction or through physical document exchanges.
How Old Was Alan Alda When He Started Mash, General Strain Theory Strengths And Weaknesses, Hinsdale Police Blotter, Articles C