He claims visiting, inter alia, the Epinions and Hardwarezone websites, and though it appears that there was at the material time a discussion thread on the error on the Hardwarezone website, the fourth plaintiff denied having seen this. They have a common interest in bridge and this helped to cement their friendship. 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. This was borne out by the case of Chwee Kin Keong and Others v. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] SGHC 71 where an autogenerated email with "Successful Purchase Confirmation" in its subject . Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd [1947] KB 130 Chapelton v Barry UDC [1940] 1 KB 532 Chaplin v Hicks [1911] 2 KB 786 Chappell v Nestl [1960] AC 87 Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com [2006] 1 LRC 37 CIBC Mortgages v Pitt [1994] 1 AC 200 - Undue . Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:24 huh?? 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. COOTE, B. Slade, in a well reasoned article written not long after, 128 The most significant judicial pronouncement supporting this view emanates from the recent English Court of Appeal in, Thus the premise of the equitys intrusion into the effects of the common law is that the common law rule in question is seen in the particular case to work injustice, and for some reason the common law cannot cure itself. In evidence he explained his conduct in the following manner: I felt that I had done all that was conceivably within my means to ensure that the Price was not a mistake. Rather they assist in explaining how the common law has incrementally and cautiously allowed and continues to mould exceptions to the application of the objective theory of contracts. How could one seek to calculate the profit margin before finding out the true market price of the laser printer? 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. I would not however invariably equate the required conduct with fraud. The case went before both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. Evidence was given that if phone calls were indeed placed, they would from time to time limit the number of sales. The affidavits did not add anything new. 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 knowledge that the offer is not meant according to its literal terms simply displaces the objective theory of contract. [2005] 1 SLR(R) 0502 Chwee Kin Keong and others v Digilandmall.com Pte In doing so, they appear to have also conflated equitable and common law concepts. Their When pressed why he asked MsToh to do this research, the fifth plaintiffs response was unsatisfactory. u think this is the 1970s?? Parties Chwee Kin Keong & Others v. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd. Decision date 12/04/2004. 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). 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. 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. Because it was simply a matter of time before the error would inevitably be noticed and the pricing inevitably corrected. Tiong Min Yeo - SSRN (See for example the approach in Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1990] 1AllER 512.) 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" . Nor should parties regard pleadings as assuming an amoeba-like nature, susceptible to constant reshaping. 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. 27 The first plaintiff obviously took the view that the advertisement should be acted upon urgently. A typical but not essential defining characteristic of conduct of this nature is the haste or urgency with which the non-mistaken party seeks to conclude a contract; the haste is induced by a latent anxiety that the mistaken party may learn of the error and as a result correct the error or change its mind about entering into the contract. Singapore Law Blog 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. He tried to convey the impression that it never struck him that a mistake in the price posting of the laser printer could have occurred. This new template was designed to facilitate instantaneous price changes allowing them to be simultaneously reflected in the relevant Internet web pages. An FAQ guide to electronic contracts in Singapore - Lexology Normally the contract is only concluded when the acceptance is communicated by the offeree to the offeror. Section13 of the ETA deems that a message by a partys automated computer system originates from the party itself. 141 In so far as the sixth plaintiff is concerned, I emphasise that his knowledge and/or conduct of should be equated with that of the third plaintiff. Case Update: B2C2 Ltd v Quoine Pte Ltd [2019] SGHC(I) 3; Quoine v B2C2 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. - This is also the position as regards friends: see Coward v. MIB (1963). The very foundations of predictability, certainty and efficacy, underpinning contractual dealings, will be undermined if the law and/or equity expands the scope of the mistake exception with alacrity or uncertainty. 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. Web Communication: A Review Of Chwee Kin Keong And Others v. Digilandmall.com pte ltd by Rokiah Kadir [2009] 8 CLJ xxi. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall Pte Ltd - LawTeacher.net This contention is wholly untenable. 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. There is no larger noble principle, such as the sanctity of contracts, to be observed or protected in these proceedings. When the defendant learnt of the error, it promptly removed the advertisement from its websites, and informed the plaintiffs as well as 778 others who had placed orders for a total of 4,086 laser printers that the price posting was an unfortunate error, and that it would therefore not be meeting the orders. He graduated with an accounting degree from NTU. He opted to pay for all his purchases by cash on delivery. He holds an accounting degree from NTU. Court name Singapore High Court. Has an agreement been reached or not? 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. 32 Satisfied with his enquiries in relation to the printer model, he returned to the HP website and placed an order for 100 laser printers at about 2.23am. Contract Acceptance by Email - LawTeacher.net COOKE v OXLEY (1790) 3 T. R. 653. There is one important exception to this principle. The jurisdiction asserted in the former case has not developed. A contract will not be concluded unless the parties are agreed as to its material terms. On the issue of his actual knowledge and communications with the other plaintiffs at the material time, I found his evidence unsatisfactory. 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. His revelation that he did not know if this is an error or whether HP will honour this purchase, not to mention the articulation of his hope that by the time you see this email, the price is still at S$66.00 coz they might change it anytime, are all compelling in reflecting his state of mind and awareness that an error had occurred. Unilateral Mistake at Common Law and In Equity From time to time they communicate with each other via the Internet and the short messaging system (sms). The case of Hartog v Colin & Shields [1939] 3All ER 566 is incontrovertibly the leading authority in this area. To that extent, his evidence that he subsequently dismissed the notion altogether is unacceptable. In the final stage of the process, after the payment mode was indicated, each of the plaintiffs was notified successful transaction your order and payment transaction has been processed. 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)). Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR(R) 594; [2004] 2 SLR 594 (refd) Gay Choon Ing v Loh Sze Ti Terence Peter [2009] 2 SLR(R) 332; [2009] 2 SLR 332
Newbridge On The Charles Rehabilitation Center,
Morningside Primary School Staff,
Articles C
