As part of its business, it operates a website owned by Hewlett Packard (HP) at http://www.buyhp.com.sg (the HP website) where only HP products are sold. 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 Alarm bells would have sounded immediately. 54 The fourth plaintiff admits that he had entertained the idea at the material time that the price posting could have been an error. 2 Who is correct? 123 One view maintains that the mistaken party can either attempt to have the contract declared void at common law if the mistake is fundamental or radical, or alternatively seek a remedy in equity, which could include rescission. . The case went before both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. He classifies mistake in the following manner at 386: If attention is fixed merely on the factual situations, there are three possible types of mistake: common, mutual and unilateral. So there is a contract and therefore the defendant is liable in breach of contract. (See for example the approach in Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1990] 1AllER 512.) 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. He was also involved in initiating the Channel NewsAsia report (see [78] and [79] infra). 155 The Internet has revolutionised commerce and radically altered the manner in which commercial interaction currently takes place. There cannot be any legitimate expectation of enforcement on the part of the non-mistaken party seeking to take advantage of appearances. 96 In an Internet sale, a prospective purchaser is not able to view the physical stock available. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:47 u make me greedy, Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:47 ok lor if you insist . 4, 1971, p. 331. 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. Free resources to assist you with your legal studies! 10 News of the rather extraordinary laser printer pricing began to spread like wildfire within the local Internet community. 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. Unilateral Mistake at . In light of these general observations, I now address the law on unilateral mistake. 74 Under product description on each webpage, instead of the actual description of the laser printer which in this case should have been HP9660A Color LaserJet 4600, only the numerals 55 appeared: this was the result of Samuel Teos earlier inadvertent input. In this case, Defendant was selling IT products over internet in Singapore. He said he had by then discovered from his Internet searches that the price of the laser printer was in the region of $3,000. 2. Mutual promises, by all accounts, on the basis of existing case law, more than amply constitute consideration. 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 . 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. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. He opted to pay for all his purchases by cash on delivery. His counsel contends that the idea the price was a mistake never arose in the second plaintiffs mind; he was preoccupied with thinking about the profit potential of the laser printers. No cash had been collected. Ltd.1 has the makings of a student's classic for several reasons: it presents a textbook example of offer and acceptance; it is set in the context of internet contracting; it involves the use in evidence of email, instantaneous messaging, and short messaging system (SMS); and it . A court is not likely to take a sympathetic view of such manner of amendment. Take a look at some weird laws from around the world! 3. 93 Website advertisement is in principle no different from a billboard outside a shop or an advertisement in a newspaper or periodical. 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. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. Therefore, administrative law encompasses Is the Right to Privacy Adequately Protected? I do not accept that there were no discussions between them on the price posting being an error. There was no satisfactory reason for the genesis of this e-mail (see [67] infra). Singapore Comparative Law Review 2019 (SCLR 2019) - Issuu 8 The proper description of the laser printer, HPC9660A Color LaserJet 4600, was, as a result of the accident, replaced by the numerals 55; while the numerals 66 replaced the correct price of the laser printer priced at $3,854 and the numerals 77 replaced the original corporate price of the laser printer priced at $3,448. He subsequently sent the web link to the Epinions website to the first and second plaintiffs. In such cases, where the purchaser has readily accessible means from the very same computer screen, to ascertain through a simple search whether a mistake has taken place, the onus could be upon him to exonerate himself of imputed knowledge of the mistake. This constituted more than a quarter of the total number of laser printers ordered. This case is a paradigm example of an error on the human side. They have a common interest in bridge and this helped to cement their friendship. Indeed, in difficult cases, the courts in several common law jurisdictions have gone to extraordinary lengths to conjure up consideration. 52 He then called the second plaintiff on his handphone and informed him that he intended to purchase 50 laser printers. *You can also browse our support articles here >. 327. 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. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:24 huh?? I would not however invariably equate the required conduct with fraud. Prior to this he was an associate in the Intellectual Property and Technology Department of Allen & Gledhill. 144 I find, in the alternative, that the plaintiffs, given each of their backgrounds, would in any event, each have separately realised and appreciated, before placing their purchase orders, that a manifest mistake had occurred even if no communications on the error had taken place between them. Registered office: Creative Tower, Fujairah, PO Box 4422, UAE. . This rationalised the law and gives the court a broad discretion to fashion the applicable relief. The CISG has currently been adopted by 95 Contracting States world-wide. It seems to me that he was trying to tailor his evidence to fit neatly within the legal parameters of the plaintiffs case. The E-Mail Acceptance Rule. Though he initially denied this in cross-examination, he had to accept this when confronted with his own e-mail as irrefutable evidence. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:33 as many as I can! Olley v Marlborough Court [1949] 1 KB 532 Omnium D'Enterprises v . Court Determines if There's a Contract Existence - LawTeacher.net 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. The defendant is therefore entitled to recover in full its taxed costs from the plaintiffs. CLARK, B. 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. Chwee Kin Keong and Others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] SGCA 2 Civil Procedure Costs , Civil Procedure Pleadings , Contract Mistake Decision Date: 13 Jan 2005 . In submissions, his counsel attempted to play down the significance of both this conversation as well as the mass e-mail. This is a disingenuous contention that desperately attempts to palliate their conduct in the subject transactions. To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: This selection of essays, case summaries and dissertations is of relevance to law students within the Commonwealth and for those students who are studying the Rule of Law from outside the Commonwealth . 70 The third plaintiff proceeded to place orders on behalf of the sixth plaintiff on the HP website. The quintessential approach of the law is to, 106 In the Singapore context, the first port of call when confronted with issues of contract law is inevitably Professor Andrew Phangs treatise on. Upon accessing the Digilandmall website and confirming that the printer was offered there at $66 as well, he placed a further order for 25 laser printers through that website at about 3.29am. 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. He somewhat muddied the authority of his observations by apparently accepting in Gallie v Lee [1969] 2 Ch 17 at 33 (affirmed on appeal in Saunders v Anglia Building Society [1971] AC 1004) that in Cundy v Lindsay there was no contract at all. In Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd, 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. As the Channel NewsAsia report so succinctly summarised they saw a great opportunity and grabbed it. He commenced practice in 2000 and currently practices with the law firm representing the plaintiffs in this action. The recipient rule is therefore more convenient and relevant in the context of both instantaneous or near instantaneous communications. The plaintiffs assert they were not aware of the defendants mistake when they placed their orders, and had believed the offer was genuine. Inflexible and mechanical rules lead to injustice. But it is difficult to see how that can apply here. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd,( [2005]SGCA 2 ) . 132 It can be seen from this brief excursus into the law of mistake that this is an abstruse area. 42 Mark Yeow Kinn Keong has a Bachelor of Science (Economics) degree from the University of London. 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 contract stands according to the natural meaning of the words used. 57 Malcolm Tan is 30 years old and a practising advocate and solicitor. The recipients of this e-mail included the second, fourth, fifth plaintiffs and Tan Cheng Peng, the third plaintiffs girlfriend. 51 The fourth plaintiff received a phone call from the second plaintiff at about 2.00am, informing him that there was money to be made through the purchase of laser printers. He received this information through an sms message. For example, in the Singapore High Court decision of Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR 594 ("Digilandmall"), affirmed on appeal in Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] 1 SLR 502 without considering this particular issue, V K Rajah JC (as he then was) observed, as follows (at [139]): When considering the appropriate rule to apply, it stands to reason that as between sender and receiver, the party who selects the means of communication should bear the consequences of any unexpected events. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:44 if they dont honor it Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:45 sell me one lah name your price ;-) sue them lor , Desmond: 13/01/20 01:45 I think they will give vouchers or special deals. 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 on what companies who had made similar Internet errors did. The credit card payments had not been processed. In addition, each of the confirmatory e-mail responses states at the outset: [W]e will be calling you in the near future to deliver the products to the address shown below. The first and fifth plaintiffs ordered exactly a hundred laser printers each. 116 The term snapping up was aptly coined by JamesLJ in Tamplin v James (1880) 15ChD 215 at 221. 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. Ltd. has the makings of a student's classic for several reasons, including: 1. I even went to both the HP Web-Site as well as the DigilandMall Web-site to see if the prices were the same. This could account for the substantial number of Canadian cases in this area of the law. Offer and acceptances have to reach an intended recipient to be efective. His credibility on the material points was dubious, at best. Hence the first plaintiffs cryptically worded but highly significant mass e-mail where he adverted to the fact that he did not know if the defendant would honour the contracts but in any event wished all the recipients good luck. In his initial affidavit he admitted wondering whether the price was a mistake after his first order was placed. 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. Certainty in commercial transactions should not be trifled with, as this will inevitably affect how commercial and business exchanges are respected and effected. [2004 ] SGHC 71 - Court Judgement - Chwee Kin Keong and Others v 28 In any event, the first plaintiffs commercial background and business experience alone would have amply alerted him to the likelihood of the pricing being a mistake, even without his conversation with Desmond. The elements of an offer and acceptance are, 139 Next, the defendant contends that no consideration passed from the plaintiffs to them. They proceeded to file their amendments to the statement of claim as if leave had already been given. He made Internet search enquiries as to whether the printer model existed and at what price it could be resold. The fourth plaintiff duly accessed the e-mail the second plaintiff had sent him pursuant to their conversation.