89 In the circumstances, I had little hesitation in allowing the amendments sought by the defendant. Desmond intimated that the defendant would give vouchers or special deals as a matter of equitable compensation should it not honour the purchase orders. 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. Thus, while the idea of snapping up may well apply in cases one side is aware of the other sides error, I do not think it can be applied literally in the constructive knowledge cases. The plaintiffs orders were processed by the defendants automated system and confirmation notes were automatically despatched to the plaintiffs within a few minutes. He claimed that he had not asked her to do the research and that she had done it independently. Rules and case law pertaining to amendments are premised upon achieving even-handedness in the context of an adversarial system by: (a) ensuring that the parties apprise each other and the court of the essential facts that they intend to rely on in addressing the issues in controversy or dispute; (b) requiring that an amendment should be attended to in the usual course of events, at an early stage of the proceedings, to ensure that no surprise or prejudice is inflicted on or caused to opposing parties; (c) requiring careful consideration whether any amendments sought at a late stage of the proceedings will cause any prejudice to the opposing party. There were no such discussions with potential buyers. 85 Having stated the general rule, it is imperative that the rationale underlying this approach be understood. 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. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:17 what hp online?? There must be consensus ad idem. 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. Chwee Kin Keong and others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] 1 SLR(R) 502; [2005] SGCA 2. 120 The widening of jurisdiction to embrace a broad equitable jurisdiction could well encourage litigious behaviour and promote uncertainty. 47 Not content with making his own purchases, he woke up his brother and transacted 330 units on his behalf. The argument is that, despite appearances, there is no real correspondence of offer and acceptance and that therefore the transaction must necessarily be void. Daniel was previously a partner and head of the technology practice at Messrs Rajah & Tann. He is currently self-employed and is intimately involved in the multi-level marketing sales of aromatherapy products under the Bel-Air label. If the common law continues to take precedence, then an essential mistake would void a contract ab initio. This is to be contrasted with: Hare, Inequitable Mistake (2003) 62CLJ 29, Chandler et al, Common Mistake: Theoretical Justification and Remedial Inflexibility [2004] JBL 34. I note that there have been powerful arguments made to the contrary. Their PDF Blips And Blunders: The Law Concerning Mistakes Made In Electronic C {Q V She opined that situations where unilateral mistake had been considered were those involving fraud or a very high degree of misconduct. Abstract The decision of V.K. Homestead Assets Sdn Bhd v. Contramec . Certainly, none of them had ever been induced to conduct transactions on such a scale on the Internet for any product, let alone sophisticated commercial laser printers. 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. Because it was simply a matter of time before the error would inevitably be noticed and the pricing inevitably corrected. Court name Singapore High Court. There is one important exception to this principle. 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. By their own admission, they made Internet searches through various search engines to ascertain the profits they could make. Alarm bells would have sounded immediately. A viewer from any part of the world may want to enter into a contract to purchase a product as advertised. The answer on the authorities is a mistake by one party of which the other, 111 This approach appears to have been endorsed by Judith PrakashJ in, 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, 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. A court is not likely to take a sympathetic view of such manner of amendment. I found his entire evidence relating to his communication with the first and other plaintiffs unsatisfactory and in many aspects incredulous. 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. [2005] 1 SLR(R) 0502 Chwee Kin Keong and others v Digilandmall.com Pte The defendant is therefore entitled to recover in full its taxed costs from the plaintiffs. The phrase call to enquire, it is contended, was in effect a condition precedent. The most recent and authoritative pronouncement in this area (. He holds an accounting degree from NTU. He opted to pay for all his purchases by cash on delivery. Ltd. has the makings of a student's classic for several reasons, including: 1. The Question about Validity of Postal Rule - lawteacher.net Having ascertained the true market price, it would have appeared crystal clear, given the huge disparity in the pricing, that a manifest mistake had occurred. He graduated from NTU as a bachelor of business studies, specialising in financial analysis. [The Myth of Mistake in the English Law of Contract (1954) 70LQR 385 at 396]. Please refer to the PDF copy for a print-friendly version. In Canada, the latter suffices. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall Pte Ltd - LawTeacher.net Mistakes that negative consent do not inexorably result in contracts being declared void. In some unusual circumstances where a unilateral mistake exists, the law can find a contract on terms intended by the mistaken party. Although a mistaken party will not often be able to discharge the onus of showing that the other party knew or must have known that he or she intended terms different from the terms of the offer or acceptance, it is not a necessary element that the party seeking to enforce the contract has actively contributed to the others mistake. The law of agency and that pertaining to the formation of contracts are expressly recognised in s13(8) of the ETA as continuing to apply to electronic transactions. 49 Tan Cheng Pengs brief evidence did not really assist the third plaintiff. u think this is the 1970s?? Despite their familial relationship, the legal relationship between the two of them was that of agent and principal. Secondly, widening the scope of mistake, unilateral or otherwise, under the rubric of equitable mistake will, with its malleability, only encourage uncertainty and litigation. 151 The claims by the plaintiffs are audacious, opportunistic and contrived. Copyright 2003 - 2023 - LawTeacher is a trading name of Business Bliss Consultants FZE, a company registered in United Arab Emirates. I am not prepared, after full consideration, to assume that the reporters misquoted the facts. e-Archive | SAcLJ | AP Journals Online 150 The plaintiffs have contended that this court ought to follow the decision in Taylor v Johnson and hold that the contract is not void under common law but voidable only in equity. Transactions over websites are almost invariably instantaneous and/or interactive. This is in contrast to the English position where after several decades, 125 The principal source of this view has been Lord DenningMR. In that sense, it is akin to ordinary posting. The plaintiffs refute that the error exonerates the defendant; they insist that a concluded contract is sacrosanct and must be honoured. The plaintiffs assert they were not aware of the defendants mistake when they placed their orders, and had believed the offer was genuine. 132 It can be seen from this brief excursus into the law of mistake that this is an abstruse area. It may be impractical and unjust to demand that the mistaken party actually prove the knowledge of a substantial number of people who effect numerous purchases. PDF Case Note - School of Advanced Study Furthermore, they relied on a passage from Singapore Civil Procedure 2003 (Sweet & Maxwell Asia, 2003) at para20/8/47 that asserts: At the trial leave to amend particulars will as a rule be refused (Moss v Malings (1886) 83ChD 603). 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 credit card payments had not been processed. Chwee KIN Keong AND Others v Digilandmall.COM PTE LTD [2004 ] SGHC 71 paginator.book page 594 tuesday, november 2009 7:05 am 594 singapore law reports (reissue . The text of the e-mail further reinforces the point. To determine the profit potential, the second plaintiff had to take steps to ascertain the true market price of the laser printer which he did. 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. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd. Case Nos: Suit 202/2003/E (for the first instance), CA/30/2004 (for the appeal) in the High Court of Singapore (at first instance), Singapore Court of Appeal. 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 initial order for 30 laser printers was placed at round 3.45am while the second order for 300 units was placed at around 3.53am. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd | India Contract Law I do not know if this is an error or whether HP will honour this purchase. This contention is wholly untenable. 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. 681) when the court had to decide the moment of contr act formation by post. - Rebutting presumption: "The question [whether or not there is a binding contract] must depend on the Added to his own purchases of 760 units, he was effectively responsible for the purchase of 1,090 laser printers. There must be consensus ad idem. Computer glitches can cause transmission failures, garbled information or even change the nature of the information transmitted. 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. If anything, certain portions of the affidavits raised even more doubts about the plaintiffs credibility. 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. 111 In Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] 1 SLR(R) 502 ("Chwee Kin Keong"), this court said at [101]: Under O 20 r 5(1) of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2004 Rev Ed), the court may grant leave to amend a pleading at any stage of the proceedings. Indeed, I am satisfied to the contrary. This, by an uncanny coincidence, was the same person whom he had intended to consult in the resale of the laser printers a topic that he had discussed with the second plaintiff earlier that morning. CISG-online | CISG-online.org 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. Certainty in commercial transactions should not be trifled with, as this will inevitably affect how commercial and business exchanges are respected and effected. 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. 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. clout_case_500 - UNCITRAL This is without basis. 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. 102 Inevitably mistakes will occur in the course of electronic transmissions. They are not mechanical rules to be applied in a vacuum, devoid of a contextual setting. I even went to both the HP Web-Site as well as the DigilandMall Web-site to see if the prices were the same. The same view is echoed in Halsburys Laws of Singapore vol7 (Butterworths Asia, 2000) at [80.164]. 127 The attempt to conflate the concept of common law mistake and the equitable jurisdiction over mistake is understandable but highly controversial. 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. Evidence was given that if phone calls were indeed placed, they would from time to time limit the number of sales. They want Digiland to honour the deal or at least to compensate them. Free resources to assist you with your legal studies! 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. There was no satisfactory reason for the genesis of this e-mail (see [67] infra). Chwee Kin Keong Vs | PDF - Scribd The prospective buyer has to make an offer to purchase which is then accepted by the merchant. In principle, there is no difference between amending particulars and amending say, a cause of action, defence or any other part of substance in a pleading. Parties Chwee Kin Keong & Others v. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd. Decision date 12/04/2004. 112 Phang ([106] supra, at 418) rightly observes: It must be stressed that, in this context, a man is taken to have known what would have been obvious to a reasonable person in the light of the surrounding circumstances. These orders were placed at a price of S$66 each, whereas the actual price was S$3,854 each. Clout issue 43. Olley v Marlborough Court [1949] 1 KB 532 Omnium D'Enterprises v . Document Citado por Relacionados. chwee kin keong v digilandmall high court The point is, there is a chasm between a clarification amendment and a new or distinct issue being raised at a later stage. 124 A number of decisions over the last five decades emanating from several common law jurisdictions even go so far as to suggest that with the integration of the courts of common law and equity, equitable principles now hold sway and that earlier common law decisions need reinterpretation. 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. V K Rajah JC: Para continuar leyendo. The businessmen saw a great opportunity and grabbed it placing an order for 1,000 printers. This is not a case about bargain hunting which is a time honoured and perfectly legitimate pursuit. See now, also, This assertion is patently untrue. (See for example the approach in, 142 The plaintiffs were bound by personal relationships as well as past and present common commercial interests. Interestingly, Desmond also remarked to the first plaintiff that he wasnt greedy before I tok to u. The other knows, or must be taken to know, of his mistake. Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corp. [1955] 2 Q.B. 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. 99 Like the somewhat arbitrary selection of the postal rule for ordinary mail, in the ultimate analysis, a default rule should be implemented for certainty, while accepting that such a rule should be applied flexibly to minimise unjustness. v . A contract will not be concluded unless the parties are agreed as to its material terms. 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. There is no doubt that the plaintiffs acted with indecent haste in the dead of the night in placing as many orders as each of them felt their financial resources credibly permitted them to do. This e-mail was sent only after the first plaintiff had made his own Internet searches on the pricing of the laser printer. 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. 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. The court held that the acceptance has been completed once it is posted although here, the defendants actually did not receive the letter before they sold it to someone else. Reference this A particular class of case which illustrates unilateral mistake as to the terms intended, known to the other party, is that in which an offer which would be very advantageous to the offeree is snapped up by the offeree. As most web merchants have automated software responses, they need to ensure that such automated responses correctly reflect their intentions from an objective perspective. 5 A related website for corporate clients and re-sellers (the Digiland commerce website) is owned and operated by a related entity, Digiland International Limited (DIL). Defence counsel indicated that he wanted to regularise the position on the agency relationship between third and sixth plaintiffs which had been thrashed out during cross-examination; he also wished to plead additional particulars of the respective plaintiffs actual knowledge of or belief in a mistake having occurred, which had emerged both before and during the hearing.