Notwithstanding, the defendant does not take issue with this as the sixth plaintiffs orders were received and the appropriate automated responses generated. 83 The defendant maintained that there was no element of surprise and/or prejudice arising from the amendments. Section11 of the ETA expressly provides that offers and acceptances may be made electronically. This constituted more than a quarter of the total number of laser printers ordered. The first, second and third plaintiffs have been friends for a long time and are bound by common business interests. Caveat emptor remains a cornerstone of the law of contract and business relationships. David Baxter Edward Thomas and Peter Sandford Gander v BPE Solicitors (a firm) [2010] EWHC 306 (Ch) Dunlop v Higgins (1848) 1 HLC 381. 53 He claimed that seeing the same price on the Digilandmall website confirmed his view that there had been no mistake. The knowledge that the offer is not meant according to its literal terms simply displaces the objective theory of contract. Cases of fraud and misrepresentation, and undue influence, are all catered for under other existing and uncontentious equitable rules. 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. 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. 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. 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. The second, third, fourth and sixth plaintiffs are the only individuals who ordered more than a hundred laser printers each. The marrow of contractual relationships should be the parties intention to create a legal relationship. Any reasonable person, given the extent of the knowledge and information the plaintiffs were armed with, would have come to a similar conclusion. 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 . It appears that in Convention transactions, the receipt rule applies unless there is a contrary intention. Unilateral Mistake at . 111 This approach appears to have been endorsed by Judith PrakashJ in Ho Seng Lee Construction Pte Ltd v Nian Chuan Construction Pte Ltd [2001] 4 SLR 407 at [84] where it was also accepted that: The test is an objective one based on what a reasonable person would have known in similar circumstances. The defendant was entitled to stake its entire defence on the basis of common law, though it would have been prudent ex abundanti cautela to have asserted the equitable position in the alternative. He is currently employed as an accountant in an accounting firm, Ernst & Young. 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. 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 sender will usually receive a prompt response. 63 It is pertinent he too made web searches using the Google search engine. The issue could be critical where third party rights are in issue as in Shogun. The elements of an offer and acceptance are ex facie satisfied in every transaction asserted in the plaintiffs claims. He seemed to suggest that in a number of cases going as far back as Cundy v Lindsay (1878) 3App Cas 459, the contracts in issue therein should be treated as only being voidable in equity: see Solle v Butcher at 692, Lewis v Averay [1972] 1 QB 198 at 207 and dicta in Magee v Pennine Insurance Co Ltd [1969] 2 QB 507 at 514 where he opined that: A common mistake, even on a most fundamental matter, does not make a contract void at law: but it makes it voidable in equity. The essential point remains: will prejudice be caused and/or are any policy considerations called into play. 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. In New Zealand, the legislature enacted the Contractual Mistake Act 1977. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. 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 pricing was a mistake, which was fundamental to the contract and the complainants must have known that this absurdly low pricing was an error by the defendants. 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. 30th Sep 2021 73 The sixth plaintiffs orders did not receive matching confirmations from the defendant as his e-mail box was full. The reason for this inconsistent conduct surfaced later. Offer and acceptances have to reach an intended recipient to be efective. He worked for a short period in the IT Project Development department of the Standard Chartered Bank, where he became acquainted with the first plaintiff. He was also involved in initiating the Channel NewsAsia report (see [78] and [79] infra). Yong Pung HowCJ in, [T]he function of the court is to try as far as practical experience allows, to ensure that the, Tan Sok Ling, Malcolm Tan and Mohan Das Vijayaratnam (Tan S L and Partners) for plaintiffs;
Desmond: 13/01/20 01:41 u want it for profit or personal use? 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. 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. There are in this connection two schools of thought. It is significant that some of the plaintiffs had never made any prior Internet purchases before that eventful morning. 54 The fourth plaintiff admits that he had entertained the idea at the material time that the price posting could have been an error. There was no element of surprise or prejudice to the plaintiffs as the points raised had already been developed by the defendant and addressed by the plaintiffs. I have carefully considered the issue of costs and have noted that the defendant had, in the process of mounting a root and branch attack on the plaintiffs claim, pursued some unmeritorious contentions. It would be illogical to have different approaches for different product sales over the Internet. 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. Neither party raised any objections. 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 . To confine this exception to instances of fraud would make the concept of unilateral mistake redundant. Civil Procedure Pleadings . They were clearly anxious to place their orders before the defendant took steps to correct the error. From time to time there will be cases where this is an overriding consideration. This may be too high a price to pay in this area of the law. The E-Mail Acceptance Rule. Ltd. Yeo Tiong Min* I. He seemed to suggest that in a number of cases going as far back as, He somewhat muddied the authority of his observations by apparently accepting in, 126 The Australian courts appear to have relied on the views of Lord DenningMR in, 127 The attempt to conflate the concept of common law mistake and the equitable jurisdiction over mistake is understandable but highly controversial. In the eyes of Singapore law, purported contracts entered into in similar circumstances are void ab initio. 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. 102 Inevitably mistakes will occur in the course of electronic transmissions. MrYeow said: After we ordered, the very next day, some of us have even gone up to talk to buyers in the market about the units. 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. 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. The following excerpts are particularly relevant: Desmond: 13/01/20 01:17 go hp online now. His girlfriend, Tan Cheng Peng, is also a director and shareholder of the company in which he has a stakeholding with the first and second plaintiffs. The issue could be critical where third party rights are in issue as in. 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. When, however, the cases provoked by these factual situations are analysed, they will be seen to fall, not into three, but only two distinct legal categories. chwee kin keong and others digilandmall.com pte ltd sghc 71 case number suit decision date 12 april 2004 high court coram rajah jc counsel name(s) tan sok ling Skip to document Ask an Expert Sign inRegister Sign inRegister Home Ask an ExpertNew My Library Discovery Institutions Republic Polytechnic London School of Business and Finance It is asserted that since mistake had not been pleaded as an equitable defence, equity cannot be invoked by the defendant. Given its global reach and ever changing technological advancements, Internet usage will pose a myriad of issues for resolution. Altogether he sought to purchase 760 units, the largest number of orders placed by anyone between 8 and 13January 2003. 18 He said he later conducted some searches using the Google search engine and ascertained that the laser printer could be sold at about US$1,300 in certain markets. 139 Next, the defendant contends that no consideration passed from the plaintiffs to them. The defendants argued this pricing was a unilateral mistake and that the complainants took advantage of this. 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.