The issue could be critical where third party rights are in issue as in Shogun. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:43 yeah man whats the original price? 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. This was summarily resolved. I was neither impressed nor convinced. 36 The second plaintiff was the key person and pivotal in the entire chain of events. The payment mode opted for was cash on delivery. 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. 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. In this case we have heard full argument, which has provided what we believe has been the first opportunity in this court for a full and mature consideration of the relation between Bell v Lever Bros Ltd [1932] AC 161 and Solle v Butcher. 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. Indeed, upon re-examination, he attempted to distance himself from the portion of his affidavit suggesting that the possibility of a genuine mistake had crossed his mind after the first transaction. The only court judgement on the theme is Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd, a judgement of the Singapore High Court. The fact that it may have been negligent is not a relevant factor in these proceedings. This contention is wholly untenable. The following excerpts are particularly relevant: Desmond: 13/01/20 01:17 go hp online now. 32 Satisfied with his enquiries in relation to the printer model, he returned to the HP website and placed an order for 100 laser printers at about 2.23am. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:46 hahahaha yeah lor .. aiyah why u only buy 3????? It argues that the decision is both fair and economically grounded, and proposes an alternative view to that offered by classical contract law - one that sees fairness intertwined This price was much lower than the actual retail price, and had been posted on the defendant's website by mistake. This, in a nutshell, is the issue at the heart of these proceedings. 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. 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 . 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. 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. Interestingly, Desmond also remarked to the first plaintiff that he wasnt greedy before I tok to u. 64 The fifth plaintiff was vague and tentative in many crucial aspects of his evidence. By their own admission, they made Internet searches through various search engines to ascertain the profits they could make. Loose language may result in inadvertently establishing contractual liability to a much wider range of purchasers than resources permit. 110 In OT Africa Line Ltd v Vickers Plc [1996] 1Lloyds Rep 700 at 703, ManceJ held that the objective theory ought not to apply if a party had knowledge that a mistake had occurred: The question is what is capable of displacing that apparent agreement. The Instantaneous Transmission of Acceptances. 3. 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. I do not know if this is an error or whether HP will honour this purchase. Case name. 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. It seems to me that he was trying to tailor his evidence to fit neatly within the legal parameters of the plaintiffs case. However, not all principles will or can apply in the same manner that they apply to traditional paper-based and oral contracts. We are, Our conclusion is that it is impossible to reconcile, In this case we have heard full argument, which has provided what we believe has been the first opportunity in this court for a full and mature consideration of the relation between, 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, 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. Websites often provide a service where online purchases may be made. One reason for this is the eternal tension faced by courts and judges alike in seeking a just equilibrium between commercial certainty and justice in a particular case. They have taken into account both the English and Australian authorities in distilling the jurisprudence in this area. He appears to have been in constant communication with the second plaintiff and to have received and read the mass e-mail from the first plaintiff after he placed his first purchase order. 52 He then called the second plaintiff on his handphone and informed him that he intended to purchase 50 laser printers. [The Myth of Mistake in the English Law of Contract (1954) 70LQR 385 at 396]. Between 3.13am and 4.00am the second plaintiff revisited the website four times placing four further orders for 20 laser printers each time. It appears to suggest that even if an offer is snapped up, the contract is not void. [emphasis added]. The defendant also sells HP products on its own website at http://www.digiland.com (the Digilandmall website). Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR 594; [2004] SGHC 71. It appears that it wanted to leave no stone unturned and had therefore mounted a root and branch attack on the plaintiffs claims. The contract stands according to the natural meaning of the words used. This is one of the first prominent case that deals with the issue of web based contract. There were no such discussions with potential buyers. 47 Not content with making his own purchases, he woke up his brother and transacted 330 units on his behalf. Looking for a flexible role? In fact, he and the fourth plaintiff have jointly conceptualised and implemented an Internet-related business. The sender will usually receive a prompt response. The decision of V.K. Abstract. 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)). The recipient rule appears to be the logical default rule. The caption in each of the e-mails Successful Purchase Confirmation from HP online says it all. Why? Both parties displayed a considerable amount of imagination in dealing with them. Therefore, administrative law encompasses Is the Right to Privacy Adequately Protected? Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. There is therefore no pre-condition in law for a mistaken party to show an absence of carelessness to avail himself of this defence; the law precludes a person from seeking to gain an advantage improperly in such circumstances. He also participates in multi-level marketing of Bel-Air aromatherapy products. The effect of Solle v Butcher [1950] 1 KB 671 is not to supplement or mitigate the common law: it is to say that Bell v Lever Bros Ltd was wrongly decided. [emphasis added]. 153 These statements of jurisprudence are of cardinal importance in understanding and fashioning the law of contract. Solicita tu prueba. The case went before both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. The rigour in limiting this scope is also critical to protect innocent third party rights that may have been acquired directly or indirectly. 43 After receiving a call from the first plaintiff at about 2.00am informing him that he had found an opportunity to make money as there was an arbitrage position to be achieved for some Hewlett Packard printers, the third plaintiff duly accessed his e-mail and visited the HP website. The law of mistake has generated its own genre of mistakes and obfuscation. 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. 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. The defendant is therefore entitled to recover in full its taxed costs from the plaintiffs. 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. He holds an accounting degree from NTU. Alarm bells would have sounded immediately. It appears that he was also in touch with the fifth plaintiff as evidenced by an e-mail sent later that morning by the fifth plaintiff to both him and the second plaintiff containing research, 52 He then called the second plaintiff on his handphone and informed him that he intended to purchase 50 laser printers. 30th Sep 2021 Someone referred me to the HP website which shows the price of this HP Colour LaserJet 4600 Series as S$66.00. 71 The sixth plaintiffs position can be dealt with very briefly. Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corp. [1955] 2 Q.B. This may be too high a price to pay in this area of the law. The common law has drawn the line in Bell v Lever Bros Ltd. To that extent, his evidence that he subsequently dismissed the notion altogether is unacceptable. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd,( [2005]SGCA 2 ) . 103 The amalgam of factors a court will have to consider in risk allocation ought to include: (a) the need to observe the principle of upholding rather than destroying contracts, (b) the need to facilitate the transacting of electronic commerce, and. Voces del tesauro. 34 He also visited the Digilandmall website to familiarise himself with their standard terms and conditions. 105 It is not only reasonable but right that the objective appearance of a contract should not operate in favour of a party who is aware, in the eyes of the law, of the true state of affairs when, for instance, there is real misapprehension on the part of the mistaken party and when the actual reality of the situation is starkly obvious. There must be consensus ad idem. This is without basis. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:24 huh?? A prospective purchaser is entitled to rely on the terms of the web advertisement. Phang, Controversy in Common Mistake [2003] Conv 247; Reynolds, Reconsider the Contract Textbooks (2003) 119LQR 177. He placed another order for a further 150 printers at 3.14am, followed by two further orders for 300 printers each at about 3.56am and 3.59am. 68 Yeow Kinn Oei is 29 years old and the brother of the third plaintiff. 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 cash had been collected. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:24 just ordered 3 colour lazer printer for S$66.00 each. The credit card payments had not been processed. 54 The fourth plaintiff admits that he had entertained the idea at the material time that the price posting could have been an error. The goods are not on offer but are said to be an invitation to treat. Quite apart from this singularly precise timing, his exchange with Ms Toh is noteworthy for the following reason: when he told her about the various concluded purchases of the laser printers, she immediately thought it was a mistake and that HP would not honour the contracts. The relevant text reads: WHILE surfing the Net at about 2am on Monday, MrTan Wei Teck stumbled upon an offer he could not believe $66 for a Hewlett Packard laserjet printer that normally sells for $3,854 before GST. 100 There is however another statute that ought to be taken into consideration in determining the appropriate default rule in e-commerce transactions. The rules of offer and acceptance are satisfied and the parties are of one mind. It appears that in Convention transactions, the receipt rule applies unless there is a contrary intention. 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. 58 The fifth plaintiff was first informed by the second plaintiff at about 2.30am about cheap laser printers being available for purchase. 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. That said, it also offers new avenues of evidential proof offering intimate insights into realtime thought processes and reactions. The CISG has currently been adopted by 95 Contracting States world-wide. The payment mode opted for was cash on delivery. At 4.15am, he sent an email to the first plaintiff, copied to the second plaintiff, with a happy emoticon following check out the prices here (see [19]. He acknowledged having had conversations with the other plaintiffs about how much money we can sell the printer and how much we can make and about storage space as well as how many units we intend to buy. 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. 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. His own counsels description of him as careful and prudent only serves to corroborate this. 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. This is a matter perhaps best left to law reform rather than to incremental judge-made law which may sow the seeds of confusion and harvest the returns of uncertainty. 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. In short, where does the justice reside? 65 He was particularly circumspect in recounting his communications with the second plaintiff. 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. 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. 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.
Pepperidge Farm Routes Are They Worth It,
Why Is Line Of Dance Counter Clockwise,
Black Uhlans President,
Articles C