Rock Richard Monahan, Marcus Luttrell Injury Photos, John David Montgomery Son Of Dinah Shore, Articles C

Clout issue 43. The following excerpts are particularly relevant: Desmond: 13/01/20 01:17 go hp online now. Suggested Citation: Seng, Daniel Kiat Boon, Quoine Pte Ltd v B2C2 Ltd: A Commentary (June 2020). He was also a partner in what is described as a printing business. Therefore, administrative law encompasses Is the Right to Privacy Adequately Protected? - See also Balfour v. Balfour (1919). 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. It is essential that the law be perceived as embodying rationality and fairness while respecting the commercial imperative of certainty. Nor could he satisfactorily explain why he initially made the Internet searches to ensure the offer was genuine. 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. Her evidence was inconsequential and did not assist the plaintiffs. 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. The recipient rule is therefore more convenient and relevant in the context of both instantaneous or near instantaneous communications. In terms of chronological sequence, the initial page accessed was the shopping cart, followed by checkout-order particulars, checkout-order confirmation, check-out payment details and payment whether by cash on delivery or by credit card. This gives their courts a broad and elastic jurisdiction to deal with commercially inappropriate behaviour. He offered to buy a laser printer from Desmond at double the price, that is $132. He is also described as the sole proprietor and manager of two other businesses that provide business support and consultancy. It appears there were a series of sms messages between them and at least a few telephone discussions while the purchases were being effected. It is important not to force into a Procrustean bed principles that have to be modified or discarded when considering novel aspects of the Internet. Someone referred me to the HP website which shows the price of this HP Colour LaserJet 4600 Series as S$66.00. They are not mechanical rules to be applied in a vacuum, devoid of a contextual setting. 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. In any event, it does not appear that she disclosed the whole truth of what she knew. Samuel Teo had used all these notional numerals on the training template. 44 He made his first purchase of ten laser printers at about 2.42am. If an offeree understands an offer in accordance with its natural meaning and accepts it, the offeror cannot be heard to say that he intended the words of his offer to have a different meaning. Often the essence of good business is the use of superior knowledge. Chwee Kin Keong vs Digilandmall.com - Free download as Powerpoint Presentation (.ppt / .pptx), PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or view presentation slides online. It would be fair to say that such a person should not have any legitimate expectation that the contract in question will be either respected or sanctioned by court. They even discussed the possible scenario of the defendant not honouring the transactions. In fact, he and the fourth plaintiff have jointly conceptualised and implemented an Internet-related business. 121 While my views here are not central to my decision, the plaintiffs have adverted to this relationship in a misguided attempt to derail the defence on an arid pleading technicality. v . The plaintiffs were not being candid when they portrayed very limited exchanges between themselves, dealing allegedly with only the profits to be made and their ability to resell the laser printers. Notwithstanding, the defendant does not take issue with this as the sixth plaintiffs orders were received and the appropriate automated responses generated. High Court and Court of Appeal, recently, in a number of case . 135 The defendant however asserts that there were no concluded contracts with any of the plaintiffs on a number of grounds. 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. SingletonJ held at 568: The offer was wrongly expressed, and the defendants by their evidence, and by the correspondence, have satisfied me that the plaintiff could not reasonably have supposed that that offer contained the offerers real intention. 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 law may not imply a condition precedent as to the availability of stock simply to bail out an Internet merchant from a bad bargain, 104 The creases over the theoretical approach to adopt in determining the existence of contracts have for some time now been decisively ironed out in favour of the objective theory. In common mistake, both parties make the same mistake. The most recent and authoritative pronouncement in this area (per Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers in Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson [2003] 3 WLR 1371 at [123]) states: A contract is normally concluded when an offer made by one party (the offeror) is accepted by the party to whom the offer has been made (the offeree). The defendant has expressly pleaded unilateral mistake. 2 Who is correct? The decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in, 25 The law of mistake was discussed in depth by McLachlinCJBC in. 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. 9 The defendants assertion that Samuel Teo had neither the authority nor the intention to make any alterations to the laser printers price is now accepted by the plaintiffs. Alarm bells would have sounded immediately. There must be consensus ad idem. He admitted in cross-examination to being the lawyer for this group of people when they had questions like these in the present proceedings. He is described by his counsel in submissions as a prudent and careful person. Indeed this appears to be the underlying rationale for the unique legal characteristics attributed to an invitation to treat; see Grainger & Son v Gough [1896] AC 325 at 333334, Esso Petroleum Ltd v Commissioners of Customs & Excise [1976] 1All ER 117 at 126. But there would have, at least, to be some real reason to suppose the existence of a mistake before it could be incumbent on one party to question whether another party meant what he or she said. This constituted more than a quarter of the total number of laser printers ordered. 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 Normally, however, the task involves no more than an objective analysis of the words used by the parties. It appears to suggest that even if an offer is snapped up, the contract is not void. No cash had been collected. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. Added to his own purchases of 760 units, he was effectively responsible for the purchase of 1,090 laser printers. 127 The attempt to conflate the concept of common law mistake and the equitable jurisdiction over mistake is understandable but highly controversial. There is however much to be said in favour of rationalising the law of mistake under a single doctrine incorporating the best elements of common law and equity. The terms of the offer are clear and unambiguous and the offeree accepts the offer according to its true sense, but it must have been obvious (and known by the offeree) that the offeror did not intend to make an offer in those terms. They were high-end commercial laser printers. 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. No rights can pass to third parties. Arrival can also be immaterial unless a recipient accesses the e-mail, but in this respect e-mail does not really differ from mail that has to be opened. 137 Furthermore, from the evidence adduced, it became clear that the defendant had intentionally put the words call to enquire instead of, say, the phrase subject to stock availability in an attempt to entice would-be purchasers to place orders with them. In effect the Internet conveniently integrates into a single screen traditional advertising, catalogues, shop displays/windows and physical shopping. Rather, in my opinion, constructive knowledge alone will suffice to invoke equitys conscience. Vincent. In short, where does the justice reside? He then zealously sent at about 2.58am, an e-mail to 54 persons, all of whom were friends and/or business associates. 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. In doing so, they appear to have also conflated equitable and common law concepts. , In mutual mistake, the parties misunderstand each other and are at cross-purposes. 71 The sixth plaintiffs position can be dealt with very briefly. In a, WHILE surfing the Net at about 2am on Monday, MrTan Wei Teck stumbled upon an offer, 82 The plaintiffs strenuously opposed the defendants amendments principally on the ground it was made at a late juncture. The essence of snapping up lies in taking advantage of a known or perceived error in circumstances which ineluctably suggest knowledge of the error. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR 594; [2004] SGHC 71. Rules of court which are meant to facilitate the conduct of proceedings invariably encapsulate concepts of procedural fairplay. The caption in each of the e-mails Successful Purchase Confirmation from HP online says it all. 21 The first plaintiff must have realised at the outset that he would have to explain with a certain measure of credibility the purport and significance of all his Internet communications between 1.00am and 3.00am on 13January 2003. Consideration was less than executory and non-existent. Desmond further informed the first plaintiff that the sale price of each laser printer was in the region of $3,000 to $4,000. Limit orders: order to be executed only when the desired price is available. 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. In the High Court, the learned judge ("the Judge") decided, in the main, in favour of the Purchaser. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. The e-mails sent at 2.34am were also captioned Go load it now! This may have created formatting or alignment issues. The neutral citation of the case Chwee Kin Keong and others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd is as follows: This citation tells us that this was the 71st case in 2004 decided in the Singapore High Court. Comments Published in English: [2004] 2 SLR 594; [2004] SGHC 71. *You can also browse our support articles here >. The decision of V.K. 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 (cf Ketteman v Hansel Properties). The payment mode opted for was cash on delivery. Doctrines and Institutions of Responsible Government. This has clearly caused much confusion in the common law jurisdictions. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:17 what hp online?? The argument is that, despite appearances, there is no real correspondence of offer and acceptance and that therefore the transaction must necessarily be void. So there is a contract and therefore the defendant is liable in breach of contract. 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. The complainants had ordered over 100 printers each at this price. 67 MsToh subsequently did some research on how companies which had committed similar mistakes over the Internet handled the aftermath. 54 The fourth plaintiff admits that he had entertained the idea at the material time that the price posting could have been an error. Prior to being self-employed, he was a corporate banker with Standard Chartered Bank, Singapore, for four years. Mutual promises, by all accounts, on the basis of existing case law, more than amply constitute consideration. Copyright 2003 - 2023 - LawTeacher is a trading name of Business Bliss Consultants FZE, a company registered in United Arab Emirates. 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. Why? He said that he wanted to be sure that the offer on the HP website was genuine. Certainty in commercial transactions should not be trifled with, as this will inevitably affect how commercial and business exchanges are respected and effected. 53 He claimed that seeing the same price on the Digilandmall website confirmed his view that there had been no mistake. They contended that the entire ICQ conversation, infused with such a jocular tone, should be disregarded. Prior to this he was an associate in the Intellectual Property and Technology Department of Allen & Gledhill. The rigour in limiting this scope is also critical to protect innocent third party rights that may have been acquired directly or indirectly. V K Rajah JC. http://www.epinions.com/HP_Color_LaserJet_4600_Series_Printer_Printers. Ltd} has the makings of a student's classic for several rea sons: it presents a textbook example of offer and acceptance; it is set in the context 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 Bell v Lever in a naked attempt to achieve equitable justice in the face of the poverty of the common law. The case went before both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. 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. They are all well-educated professionals articulate, entrepreneurial and, quite bluntly, streetwise and savvy individuals. 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. CHWEE KIN KEONG and Others v DIGILANDMALL.COM Pte Ltd (2004) 2 SLR 594. I must add that I did not really think this was necessary and subsequent events confirmed my perception. 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. Cory had chosen this mode of communication; therefore he ! with its importance set at high. Solicita tu prueba. Needless to say, this goes to the very heart of the claims sustainability. Media reports after the discovery of the mistake. The law ought to take a practical approach in dealing with such cases if it appears that by exercising reasonable care the true facts ought to be known. The marrow of contractual relationships should be the parties intention to create a legal relationship. They have taken into account both the English and Australian authorities in distilling the jurisprudence in this area. Administration law is the actions made by a government, which adversely affects an individual. What is urged is that, owing to a common error as to some fundamental fact, the agreement is robbed of all efficacy. This was presumably to render the training more lifelike. by the earlier decision of Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com [2005] 1 SLR(R) 502, where the Court of Appeal recognised the doctrine of unilateral mistake in equity, departing from the English position in Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd [2003] QB 679; [2002] 3 WLR 1617; [2002] 4 All ER 689. 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 rules of offer and acceptance are satisfied and the parties are of one mind. Cases of fraud and misrepresentation, and undue influence, are all catered for under other existing and uncontentious equitable rules. The unconstrained exchange that followed between the two is both revealing and compelling. The Instantaneous Transmission of Acceptances. He then carried out some checks on the Yahoo search engine to ascertain whether the printer model existed and whether the laser printer could be sold at more than $66. After placing his second order, he admitted making further searches on the Internet to fortify my view that the price of the $66 per printer was not a mistake He was also the only plaintiff who placed an order on the Digilandmall website. I categorically reject their evidence in so far as it attempts to hermetically compartmentalise their knowledge and discussions. 30 Tan Wei Teck is 30 years old. This, in a nutshell, is the issue at the heart of these proceedings. Because it was simply a matter of time before the error would inevitably be noticed and the pricing inevitably corrected. 80 Upon the conclusion of submissions, I directed counsel to appear before me. 147 It is improper for a party who knows, believes or ought, objectively speaking, to have known of a manifest error to seek commercial benefit from such an error. Given his professional and business background, he must have realised that the $66 price posting on the HP website was an error. Where common mistake is pleaded, the presence of agreement is admitted. - Rebutting presumption: "The question [whether or not there is a binding contract] must depend on the 41 The second plaintiff seems to have redefined the facts to achieve his objective in these proceedings. Though both of them admit to having had discussions about the website terms and conditions governing the purchases, they deny that there was any discussion between them on even the possibility of an error having taken place. The fifth plaintiff was also a member of this bridge group. He is 32 years old and conducts his own network marketing business. 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. It can be persuasively argued that e-mails involving transactions embraced by the Convention are only effective on reaching the recipient. 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. Having said that, this exception must always be prudently invoked and judiciously applied; the exiguous scope of this exception is necessary to give the commercial community confidence that commercial transactions will almost invariably be honoured when all the objective contractual indicia are satisfied. 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. There can be no other reasonable explanation. 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. 104 The creases over the theoretical approach to adopt in determining the existence of contracts have for some time now been decisively ironed out in favour of the objective theory. These statements are not to be interpreted as a clarion call to rewrite commercial agreements because of a partys unreasonable or ignoble behaviour. 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. However, if the defendant did not have stock, it would immediately call the supplier and procure the products for the end-user. The question is what is capable of displacing that apparent agreement. 97 Different rules may apply to e-mail transactions and worldwide web transactions. From time to time there will be cases where this is an overriding consideration. 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. Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies. 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. (c) the need to reach commercially sensible solutions while respecting traditional principles applicable to instances of genuine error or mistake. If anything, certain portions of the affidavits raised even more doubts about the plaintiffs credibility. There are persuasive arguments against extending the litmus test of unconscionability to all mistake-type situations. It cannot also be seriously argued that there was no intention to enter into a legal relationship. Someone referred me to the HP website which shows the price of this HP Colour LaserJet 4600 Series as S$66.00. Borneo United Sawmills Sdn Bhd v. MUI Continental Insurance Bhd (Marine insurance - Loss of goods - Claim for loss of goods under Marine Cargo Policy) [2009] 8 CLJ 217. Unilateral Mistake at . It is unequivocally unethical conduct tantamount to sharp practice. The price of the laser printer, prior to 3.36pm on 8January 2003, was stipulated as $3,854 (exclusive of GST) on both the Digilandmall and HP websites (the websites), and as $3,448 on the Digiland commerce website. On the issue of his actual knowledge and communications with the other plaintiffs at the material time, I found his evidence unsatisfactory. Computer glitches can cause transmission failures, garbled information or even change the nature of the information transmitted. Do you have a 2:1 degree or higher? The reach of and potential response(s) to such an advertisement are however radically different. 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. The decision of V.K. 101 The applicable rules in relation to transactions over the worldwide web appear to be clearer and less controversial. There was a promise to pay made by the plaintiffs in exchange for the delivery of the requisite laser printers. A real product number HP9660A was inserted in the new template as the prototype for which fictional prices were to be changed on the three relevant websites. 65 He was particularly circumspect in recounting his communications with the second plaintiff. 102 Inevitably mistakes will occur in the course of electronic transmissions. Web Communication: A Review Of Chwee Kin Keong And Others v. Digilandmall.com pte ltd by Rokiah Kadir [2009] 8 CLJ xxi. Claiming he was in a light-hearted kind of mood during his ICQ (acronym for I-Seek-You) conversation with Desmond, he insisted that this conversation should be taken neither seriously nor literally. 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. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:40 if any friend got extra printer u want? To that extent, his evidence that he subsequently dismissed the notion altogether is unacceptable. 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. 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. It is significant that some of the plaintiffs had never made any prior Internet purchases before that eventful morning. He was amicus curiae to the Court of Appeal of Singapore in the case of Chwee Kin Keong & Ors v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd, the leading Singapore case on unilateral mistake in the digital environment. The price for equitable justice is uncertainty. Court name Singapore High Court. The elements of an offer and acceptance are ex facie satisfied in every transaction asserted in the plaintiffs claims. The contract was held to be void because there was no consensus on the terms. There are, however, other sound reasons to argue against such a rule in favour of the recipient rule. Thus, 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. One of the few cases on electronic contract formation in Singapore was Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall. 108 Chitty on Contracts (28th Ed, 1999) vol1 observes at para5-035: It is not clear whether for the mistake to be operative it must actually be known to the other party, or whether it is enough that it ought to have been apparent to any reasonable man.