Unilateral Mistake at . 122 For now it appears that a mistaken party can have two bites at the cherry. This thread helps to rationalise the development of the common law but ought not to be viewed as supporting the existence of a general test of commercial morality tantamount to the test of unconscionability invoked by equity. Looking for a flexible role? Furthermore, they relied on a passage from, At the trial leave to amend particulars will as a rule be refused (, 84 It is axiomatic that a court will generally be cautious if not reluctant to effect any amendments once the hearing has commenced; even more so once the evidential phase of the proceedings has been completed. 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 Vienna Sales Convention (the Convention) applies in Singapore as a consequence of the Sale of Goods (United Nations Convention) Act (Cap283A, 1996Rev Ed). He is currently self-employed and is intimately involved in the multi-level marketing sales of aromatherapy products under the Bel-Air label. . Different protocols may result in messages arriving in an incomprehensible form. 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. 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. After further sms exchanges, the second plaintiff contacted the fifth plaintiff on his mobile phone, urging him to return home to access the e-mail message he had just sent. There must be consensus ad idem. So there is a contract and therefore the defendant is liable in breach of contract. Their 131 In a number of cases, including the present, it may not really matter which view is preferred. 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. The contract stands according to the natural meaning of the words used. 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.
Chwee Kin Keong and Others v Pte Ltd PDF fileChwee Kin A contract will not be concluded unless the parties are agreed as to its material terms. 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 coz they might change it anytime, are all compelling in reflecting his state of mind and awareness that an error had occurred. be rebutted" (per Salmon LJ in Jones v. Padavatton (1969)). 33 After his first order, the second plaintiff contacted the fourth and fifth plaintiffs informing them about the laser printers. The defendants wanted to sell some hare skins to the plaintiffs. chwee kin keong v digilandmall high court. 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]. He then zealously sent at about 2.58am, an e-mail to 54 persons, all of whom were friends and/or business associates. While the first plaintiff was the source of the information concerning the price posting, the second plaintiff actively communicated with all of the plaintiffs (save the sixth plaintiff), throughout the material period. Promotions would be indicated by a P inside a yellow circle next to the product in question. This is in contrast to the English position where after several decades Hartog v Colin & Shields still remains the locus classicus. Often the essence of good business is the use of superior knowledge. 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. First, it is clear that the line of Australian and Canadian cases have broadened their equitable jurisdiction on the strength of dicta attributable principally to Lord Denning. Chwee Kin Keong vs Digilandmall.com Date of Verdicts: 12 April 2004, 13 January 2005. 156 The plaintiffs claims are dismissed. It cannot also be seriously argued that there was no intention to enter into a legal relationship. In fact, he and the fourth plaintiff have jointly conceptualised and implemented an Internet-related business. The defendant has expressly pleaded unilateral mistake. The first plaintiffs callname in this exchange is Scorpio. Inflexible and mechanical rules lead to injustice. The leading Canadian decision in this area is the case of, 120 The widening of jurisdiction to embrace a broad equitable jurisdiction could well encourage litigious behaviour and promote uncertainty. Upon completing this sequence, each of the orders placed by the plaintiffs was confirmed by automated responses from the respective websites stating Successful Purchase Confirmation from HP online. Therefore, administrative law encompasses Is the Right to Privacy Adequately Protected? The plaintiffs orders were processed by the defendants automated system and confirmation notes were automatically despatched to the plaintiffs within a few minutes. I accept that this is capable of including circumstances in which a person refrains from or simply fails to make enquiries for which the situation reasonably calls and which would have led to discovery of the mistake. 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.
Litigation Singapore Lawyer, Doris Chia - David Lim & Partners LLP On the issue of his actual knowledge and communications with the other plaintiffs at the material time, I found his evidence unsatisfactory. Yet in other aspects, he could recollect, with crystal clear precision and clarity, details of what had transpired.
Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] - YouTube 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. He had left everything to his brother. Interestingly, Desmond also remarked to the first plaintiff that he wasnt greedy before I tok to u. 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. The e-mail was given a high importance priority and captioned go load it now!!. 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.
Unilateral mistake in contracts - L'Avocat Law 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 agree that this exception should be kept within a very narrow compass. In the light of that consideration we can see no way that Solle v Butcher can stand with Bell v Lever Bros Ltd. 1 In the early hours of the morning of 13January 2003, six friends, the plaintiffs in this case, placed orders over the Internet for 1,606 sophisticated Hewlett Packard commercial laser printers (the laser printer(s)). Consideration was less than executory and non-existent. I do not accept that there were no discussions between them on the price posting being an error. A steady stream of decisions from common law courts indicate a measured but nevertheless distinctly incremental willingness to extend the scope of the exception to not just actual knowledge, but deemed or constructive knowledge as well. Loose language may result in inadvertently establishing contractual liability to a much wider range of purchasers than resources permit. 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. The e-mails had all the characteristics of an unequivocal acceptance. Mistakes are usually synonymous with the existence of carelessness on the part of the mistaken party. 81 Plaintiffs counsel thereafter responded somewhat curiously. The recipient rule appears to be the logical default rule. Failure to do so could also result in calamitous repercussions.
Indeed this appears to be the underlying rationale for the unique legal characteristics attributed to an invitation to treat; see. . In his initial affidavit he admitted wondering whether the price was a mistake after his first order was placed. The financial consequences could be considerable. It became apparent that the plaintiffs misplaced reliance on the extract earlier cited probably also explained their singularly odd conduct in applying for amendments, only to withdraw their application later in attempting to deny the defendant an opportunity to amend its pleadings. The credit card payments had not been processed. 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.
A-Z of Cases | Carlil & Carbolic - Law Study Resources Caveat emptor remains a cornerstone of the law of contract and business relationships. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. We are only concerned with the question whether relief might be given for common mistake in circumstances wider than those stipulated in Bell v Lever Bros Ltd [1932] AC 161. At 4.16am he placed another order for one laser printer, by credit card, on the HP website. 115 There is a distinct line of cases within the narrow confines of unilateral mistake where the common law has been resolutely disinclined to enforce apparent contracts. The payment mode opted for was cash on delivery. In terms of chronological sequence, the initial page accessed was the shopping cart, followed by checkout-order . [emphasis added]. 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 he was prepared to commit this view in writing to a larger circle of 54 friends and business associates after his communication with the second and third plaintiffs, he would certainly have shared this view with his close friends with even greater candour and detail. Consideration was less than executory and non-existent.
Quoine Pte Ltd v B2C2 Ltd: A Commentary - SSRN 102 Inevitably mistakes will occur in the course of electronic transmissions. 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. 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. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:33 how many u intend to get? The object of the exercise is to determine what each party intended, or must be deemed to have intended. Nor could he satisfactorily explain why he initially made the Internet searches to ensure the offer was genuine. When pressed as to whether he visited other websites, he said he could not confirm that one way or the other. MrTan said: As long as we get out [sic] equitable compensation, we should be able to accept lesser terms, but thats just under consideration as well.. Desmond further informed the first plaintiff that the sale price of each laser printer was in the region of $3,000 to $4,000. There are, however, other sound reasons to argue against such a rule in favour of the recipient rule. ! with its importance set at high. The first and fifth plaintiffs ordered exactly a hundred laser printers each. This assertion is patently untrue.
"Unilateral Mistake in Law and Equity: Solle v Butcher Reinstated" by The third plaintiff informed him that laser printers were being sold at $66 each and that these laser printers could be sold at a much higher price about a thousand plus. It is essential that the law be perceived as embodying rationality and fairness while respecting the commercial imperative of certainty. [emphasis added]. It presents a textbook example of offer and acceptance. 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. If there appears to be no reasonable explanation for an absurd price discrepancy, it is axiomatic that any hasty conduct, such as the plaintiffs, in snapping up products, should be punctiliously scrutinised and dissected. 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. Where common mistake is pleaded, the presence of agreement is admitted. It is therefore incumbent on the web merchant to protect himself, as he has both the means to do so and knowledge relating to the availability of any product that is being marketed. 46 He was therefore aware, even before he made his first purchase, that the actual price of the laser printer was in the region of US$2,000. The defendants argued this pricing was a unilateral mistake and that the complainants took advantage of this. COURT. The first, second and third plaintiffs have been friends for a long time and are bound by common business interests. .
Acceptance sent through email; is the postal rule applicable? Errors may incur wholly unexpected, and sometimes untoward, consequences as these proceedings so amply demonstrate. Given his professional and business background, he must have realised that the $66 price posting on the HP website was an error. reference was made by the court to "fraud or a very high degree of misconduct" before the non- mistaken party could be . Case name. It does not purport to regulate e-commerce but attempts to facilitate the usage of e-commerce by equating the position of electronic records with that of written records, thus elevating the status of electronic signatures to that of legal signatures. No harm trying right? In that sense, it is akin to ordinary posting. Civil Procedure Pleadings . Someone referred me to the HP website which shows the price of this HP Colour LaserJet 4600 Series as S$66.00. 114 For good measure, I should allude that the plaintiffs in their written submissions concede that in order to establish that mistake is operative at common law, the defendant has to show in this instant case that the plaintiffs each had actual or constructive knowledge of the mistaken pricing. After establishing from the web pages that the price quoted for the laser printer was indeed $66, he proceeded to make searches through search engines like Yahoo and visited the website of Hardware.com. 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. Quoine was operating as a market-maker on their own platform. 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. High Court Suit No 202 of 2003. 146 A purchaser in a case of apparent unilateral mistake, who purchases for genuine own use a product, may not always be viewed as guilty of engaging in snapping up. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. 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. There are many different shades of sharp practice or impropriety. Lord Griffiths in, 87 It appeared to me that the extract from, 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 (, 95 The known availability of stock could be an important distinguishing factor between a physical sale and an Internet transaction. It should be noted that while the common law jurisdictions continue to wrestle over this vexed issue, most civil law jurisdictions lean towards the recipient rule. The reason for this inconsistent conduct surfaced later. It is axiomatic that normal contractual principles apply but the contractual permutations will obviously be sometimes more complex and spread over a greater magnitude of transactions. 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. The complainants argued that they were not aware that this price was a mistake and wanted the binding contract to be fulfilled. Between 3.13am and 4.00am the second plaintiff revisited the website four times placing four further orders for 20 laser printers each time. There is constant tension in our legal system to accommodate the Janus-like considerations of fairness and finality.
Law, Fairness and Economics - Unilateral Mistake in Digilandmall