This rationalised the law and gives the court a broad discretion to fashion the applicable relief. 14 The first, second and fourth plaintiffs became acquainted with each other when they studied at the Nanyang Technological University (NTU). 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). The fact that it may have been negligent is not a relevant factor in these proceedings. There were altogether 1,008 purchase orders for the laser printers placed by 784 individuals between 8 and 13January 2003. The defendant even had its terms and conditions posted on its website. Consideration was less than executory and non-existent. The decision of V.K. The complainants argued that they were not aware that this price was a mistake and wanted the binding contract to be fulfilled. The recipient rule is therefore more convenient and relevant in the context of both instantaneous or near instantaneous communications. It appears to suggest that even if an offer is snapped up, the contract is not void. In doing so, they appear to have also conflated equitable and common law concepts. The modern approach in contract law requires very little to find the existence of consideration. The first, second and third plaintiffs have been friends for a long time and are bound by common business interests. In other words, he really wanted to ascertain the true price of the laser printer. The rigour in limiting this scope is also critical to protect innocent third party rights that may have been acquired directly or indirectly. 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. 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. While this case needs to be treated with some caution, as it appears to integrate concepts of law and equity, I respectfully agree with the approach in so far as it deals with deemed knowledge. Palm tree justice will only serve to inject uncertainty into the law. There could be different considerations. Alarm bells would have sounded immediately. However, if the defendant did not have stock, it would immediately call the supplier and procure the products for the end-user. There cannot be any legitimate expectation of enforcement on the part of the non-mistaken party seeking to take advantage of appearances. He commenced practice in 2000 and currently practices with the law firm representing the plaintiffs in this action. The product descriptions in all the other pages of the respective websites, at the material time, carried a full detailed description of all advertised products. Mistakes that negative consent do not inexorably result in contracts being declared void. 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. 106 In the Singapore context, the first port of call when confronted with issues of contract law is inevitably Professor Andrew Phangs treatise on Cheshire, Fifoot and Furmstons Law of Contract (2nd Singapore and Malaysian Ed, 1998). Put another way, that decision seems to indicate that the effect of a unilateral mistake is only to render a contract unenforceable rather than void. The number of orders he placed was nothing short of brazen. The current general approach is correctly stated in Professor Jeffrey Pinslers Singapore Court Practice 2003 (LexisNexis, 2003) at para20/5/7: An amendment may be allowed even after both parties have made their closing submissions. 139 Next, the defendant contends that no consideration passed from the plaintiffs to them. In any event, it does not appear that she disclosed the whole truth of what she knew. 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. There is often, but not inexorably, a co-relationship between the timing when the amendment is sought and the adverse consequences for the other party. 87 It appeared to me that the extract from Singapore Civil Procedure 2003 relied on by the plaintiffs was blindly lifted from earlier editions of the English White Book without any consideration as to how it dovetails with the present procedural climate. 13 The first plaintiff, Chwee Kin Keong, is 29 years old. I reject this. He graduated with an accounting degree from NTU. The defendant programmed the software. It can however be observed that in mass mistake cases, even when there is no direct evidence as in these proceedings, the court could be prepared to pragmatically assume actual or deemed knowledge of the manifest mistake. 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. 126 The Australian courts appear to have relied on the views of Lord DenningMR in Solle v Butcher to establish a wholly different doctrinal approach to mistake and have purportedly applied a fused concept of law and equity to the law on mistake. The E-Mail Acceptance Rule. The most recent and authoritative pronouncement in this area (. 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. 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. He received this information through an sms message. It is pertinent to note that she placed orders for 32 laser printers including 20 units she ordered on behalf of her sister. In the context of the present proceedings, the extra-judicial observations of Lord Steyn in Contract Law: Fulfilling the Reasonable Expectations of Honest Men (1997) 113LQR 433 at 433 are particularly apposite: A thread runs through our contract law that effect must be given to reasonable expectations of honest men. Having noted all this, I am nevertheless inclined towards the views expressed in the, 131 In a number of cases, including the present, it may not really matter which view is preferred. They were selling a HP laser printer and an employee accidently made a mistake as to the price of the printer on their website. 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. 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. The fourth plaintiff duly accessed the e-mail the second plaintiff had sent him pursuant to their conversation. This final mass e-mail only reinforces my view that the first plaintiff consistently and continuously entertained the view that the price posting on the HP website was a mistake. The fifth plaintiff was also a member of this bridge group. Court reference 202 of 2003. 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. 71 The sixth plaintiffs position can be dealt with very briefly. Someone referred me to the HP website which shows the price of this HP Colour LaserJet 4600 Series as S$66.00. 59 Upon duly accessing the HP website through the hyperlink sent to him by the second plaintiff, the fifth plaintiff ascertained that the laser printer was priced at $66. He conducted the searches to ascertain what the laser printers true price was. u think this is the 1970s?? [emphasis added]. (c) the need to reach commercially sensible solutions while respecting traditional principles applicable to instances of genuine error or mistake. 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. There is no question, however, that he placed the orders, that these orders were received by the HP website and that the same automated response sent to the other plaintiffs was sent out to him. 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. Added to his own purchases of 760 units, he was effectively responsible for the purchase of 1,090 laser printers. 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. 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. Where either mutual or unilateral mistake is pleaded, the very existence of agreement is denied. The rules of offer and acceptance are satisfied and the parties are of one mind. When pressed as to whether he visited other websites, he said he could not confirm that one way or the other. They are all well-educated professionals articulate, entrepreneurial and, quite bluntly, streetwise and savvy individuals. The later the amendment, the greater the adverse consequences. Having noted all this, I am nevertheless inclined towards the views expressed in the Great Peace Shipping case for the reasons articulated by Lord PhillipsMR. 155 The Internet has revolutionised commerce and radically altered the manner in which commercial interaction currently takes place. In submissions, his counsel attempted to play down the significance of both this conversation as well as the mass e-mail. 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. 7191 RSS High Court Expand/Collapse. 49 Tan Cheng Pengs brief evidence did not really assist the third plaintiff. Theoretically the supply of information is limitless. 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 shopping cart website page carried the insertion call to enquire under the heading Availability of product. They are not entitled to the costs of the subsequent brief hearing, for reasons I now deal with summarily. The law will have to organically adapt itself to respond to new challenges without compromising on certainty and fairness. This could account for the substantial number of Canadian cases in this area of the law. 80 Upon the conclusion of submissions, I directed counsel to appear before me. Some of the plaintiffs appeared rather coy or ignorant in this regard but I did not find their performance believable. Whether the parties have reached agreement on the terms is not determined by evidence of the subjective intention of each party. Secondly, widening the scope of mistake, unilateral or otherwise, under the rubric of equitable mistake will, with its malleability, only encourage uncertainty and litigation. Nor is it disputed that Samuel Teo, or any of the other employees of the defendant, was unaware at all material times of the dramatic chain of events so unwittingly initiated by the former. When giving evidence, he struck me as cautious, taking great pains to convey the impression that his numerous online enquiries that morning were routinely carried out without any real inkling that an error had occurred. Promotions would be indicated by a P inside a yellow circle next to the product in question. Registered office: Creative Tower, Fujairah, PO Box 4422, UAE. This may be too high a price to pay in this area of the law. Imagine the effect of this negative publicity on your future sales! 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. LOW, Kelvin Fatt Kin. The point is, there is a chasm between a clarification amendment and a new or distinct issue being raised at a later stage. 4, 1971, p. 331. They proceeded to file their amendments to the statement of claim as if leave had already been given. 13 The first plaintiff, Chwee Kin Keong, is 29 years old. The contract stands according to the natural meaning of the words used. The object of the exercise is to determine what each party intended, or must be deemed to have intended. be rebutted" (per Salmon LJ in Jones v. Padavatton (1969)). This can be supported by the decision of the High Court of Singapore in the case of Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd, in which Judicial Commissioner Rajah argued that "the party who selects the means of communication should bear the consequences of any unexpected events" . Notwithstanding, the defendant does not take issue with this as the sixth plaintiffs orders were received and the appropriate automated responses generated. 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. 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. 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 leading Canadian decision in this area is the case of McMaster University v Wilchar Construction Ltd (1971) 22DLR(3d) 9 which, incidentally, was cited with approval by the Australian High Court in Taylor v Johnson. 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. 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. [emphasis added]. This was presumably to render the training more lifelike. Please refer to the PDF copy for a print-friendly version. The case of, The offer was wrongly expressed, and the defendants by their evidence, and by the correspondence, have satisfied me that the plaintiff, 116 The term snapping up was aptly coined by JamesLJ in, 117 It should be emphasised that this stream of authority is consistently recognised by all the major common law jurisdictions. Not all one-sided transactions or bargains are improper. Articles 11 (1) Country Singapore. I am not prepared, after full consideration, to assume that the reporters misquoted the facts. The first and fifth plaintiffs ordered exactly a hundred laser printers each. He is currently self-employed and is intimately involved in the multi-level marketing sales of aromatherapy products under the Bel-Air label. 135 The defendant however asserts that there were no concluded contracts with any of the plaintiffs on a number of grounds. Though the six plaintiffs accounted for only 18 of these purchase orders, they figure prominently among the 11 individuals who ordered more than 50 laser printers. (See for example the approach in, 142 The plaintiffs were bound by personal relationships as well as past and present common commercial interests. 152 This view has also found support in the Singapore context. Solicita tu prueba. The plaintiffs and the defendant later reached an agreement to dispense with any further oral evidence, save for that of Tan Cheng Peng. They have taken into account both the English and Australian authorities in distilling the jurisprudence in this area. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:33 how many u intend to get? It is plain that the defendant had given careful consideration to this issue and was prepared to contract on the basis that it would be able to comply with any orders hence, there was no reference to any order being subject to stock availability. Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies. 138 Effectively, the defendant was attempting in this contention to assert that it could have its cake and eat it as well. Homestead Assets Sdn Bhd v. Contramec . She opined that situations where unilateral mistake had been considered were those involving fraud or a very high degree of misconduct. 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. Chwee Kin Keong and others v. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd. [2004] SGHC 71. The price for equitable justice is uncertainty. This can be before or during the trial, or after judgment or on appeal. 27 The first plaintiff obviously took the view that the advertisement should be acted upon urgently. Market orders: order to be executed immediately at the best available price. 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. 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. They were high-end commercial laser printers. 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. 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. 53 He claimed that seeing the same price on the Digilandmall website confirmed his view that there had been no mistake. There was also no indication that the product was being sold on promotion. The decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in, 25 The law of mistake was discussed in depth by McLachlinCJBC in. 26 I respectfully agree with the reasoning of ShawJ in Can-Dive Services Ltd v Pacific Coast Energy Corp (1995), 21CLR(2d) 39 (BCSC), where he said at 69-70 that: While I agree with what Madam Justice Mclachlin said so far as it goes, I do not believe she intended to imply that there must be a conscious taking advantage by one party of the other in all cases. Therefore, administrative law encompasses Is the Right to Privacy Adequately Protected? The purpose of the amendments was merely to regularise the pleadings and indeed they went no further than to summarise evidence and submissions that had already been raised. Chwee Kin K eong and others . There are in this connection two schools of thought. The reach of and potential response(s) to such an advertisement are however radically different. Document Citado por Relacionados. E-mails are processed through servers, routers and Internet service providers. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. 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. Our conclusion is that it is impossible to reconcile Solle v Butcher with Bell v Lever Bros Ltd. The non-mistaken partys appreciation that there is no real offer on the contracts literal terms undermines the basis of the objective theory and necessarily imports the lack of subjective intention on the part of the mistaken party. We can understand why the decision in Bell v Lever Bros Ltd did not find favour with Lord DenningMR. An equitable jurisdiction to grant rescission on terms where a common fundamental mistake has induced a contract gives greater flexibility than a doctrine of common law which holds the contract void in such circumstances. Ltd.1 has the makings of a student's classic for several rea- 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.