chwee kin keong v digilandmall high court
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. 64 The fifth plaintiff was vague and tentative in many crucial aspects of his evidence. 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. This is an online dating and match-making service. Before retiring for the night, the first plaintiff had a further discussion with the second plaintiff on how to store the laser printers they had ordered. I do not know if this is an error or whether HP will honour this purchase. This could account for the substantial number of Canadian cases in this area of the law. That said, it also offers new avenues of evidential proof offering intimate insights into realtime thought processes and reactions. 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 actual or constructive knowledge of the mistaken pricing. When pressed as to whether he visited other websites, he said he could not confirm that one way or the other. When notified and satisfied that this transaction was successful as well, he placed a final order at 4.21am for ten laser printers on the HP website, charging this to his credit card. Media reports after the discovery of the mistake. It appears to suggest that even if an offer is snapped up, the contract is not void. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd,( [2005]SGCA 2 ) . The case went before both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. They contended that the entire ICQ conversation, infused with such a jocular tone, should be disregarded. But it is difficult to see how that can apply here. They proceeded to file their amendments to the statement of claim as if leave had already been given. Chwee Kin Keong vs Digilandmall.com - Free download as Powerpoint Presentation (.ppt / .pptx), PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or view presentation slides online. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:24 just ordered 3 colour lazer printer for S$66.00 each. Registered office: Creative Tower, Fujairah, PO Box 4422, UAE. 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. 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: It is not necessary to prove actual knowledge on the part of the non-mistaken party in order to ground relief, as, In summary therefore, the equitable jurisdiction of the Courts to relieve against mistake in contract comprehends situations where one party, who knows or ought to know of anothers mistake in a fundamental term, remains silent and snaps at the offer, seeking to take advantage of the others mistake. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. As part of its business, it operates a website owned by Hewlett Packard (HP) at, 16 When the first plaintiff eventually succeeded in accessing the HP website, he immediately placed an order for 100 laser printers at about, 17 Having called the second and third plaintiffs at about. 66 The fifth plaintiff also gave evidence that the next morning, when he logged on his computer, he noted that a Hong Kong lawyer friend, Coral Toh, was also logged onto her computer. I granted leave to both parties to file applications to amend the pleadings. It can be noted, however, that while s15 of the ETA appears to be inclined in favour of the receipt rule, commentaries indicate that it is not intended to affect substantive law. 123 One view maintains that the mistaken party can either attempt to have the contract declared void at common law if the mistake is fundamental or radical, or alternatively seek a remedy in equity, which could include rescission. 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. 54 The fourth plaintiff admits that he had entertained the idea at the material time that the price posting could have been an error. 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 The other school of thought views the approach outlined earlier with considerable scepticism. 19 Later in the morning, at about 4.15am, the fourth plaintiff sent the following e-mail to the first plaintiff, copied to the second plaintiff only: Subject: Re: IMPT HP Colour LaserJet going at only $66!! As a lawyer, he appears to have been indispensable in the plaintiffs attempts to hold the defendant to the bargain. Secondly, widening the scope of mistake, unilateral or otherwise, under the rubric of equitable mistake will, with its malleability, only encourage uncertainty and litigation. 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. The decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in 25659 BC Ltd v 456795 BC Ltd (1999) 171DLR(4th) 470 at [25] to [26], is instructive: 25 The law of mistake was discussed in depth by McLachlinCJBC in First City Capital Ltd v BC Building Corp (1989), 43BLR 29 (SC). Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd. 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. Pages 74 Ratings 100% (5) 5 out of 5 people found this document helpful; It is asserted that since mistake had not been pleaded as an equitable defence, equity cannot be invoked by the defendant. Someone referred me to the HP website which shows the price of this HP Colour LaserJet 4600 Series as S$66.00. Consideration was less than executory and non-existent. The object of the exercise is to determine what each party intended, or must be deemed to have intended. Established common law principles, in the arena of mistake, ought not be trifled with unless they are so obviously anachronistic and ill-suited to commercial and legal pragmatism. They were selling a HP laser printer and an employee accidently made a mistake as to the price of the printer on their website.. Cases 36 The second plaintiff was the key person and pivotal in the entire chain of events. 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. He was also involved in initiating the Channel NewsAsia report (see [78] and [79] infra). Take a look at some weird laws from around the world! 53 He claimed that seeing the same price on the Digilandmall website confirmed his view that there had been no mistake. The web merchant, unless he qualifies his offer appropriately, by making it subject to the availability of stock or some other condition precedent, could be seen as making an offer to sell an infinite supply of goods. The contract stands according to the natural meaning of the words used. Often the essence of good business is the use of superior knowledge. case concerning the purchase of laser printers from an online retailer, Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall 76 : To effect the purchase transactions on the respective websites, the plaintiffs had to navigate through several web pages. 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. They are all well-educated professionals articulate, entrepreneurial and, quite bluntly, streetwise and savvy individuals. It deals with the process rather than the substance of how to divine the rule. CHWEE KIN KEONG v DIGILANDMALL.COM Pte Ltd (2005) SGCA 2. The mere fact that they suddenly engage in predatory and atypical behaviour may in itself be telling. It was only then that the defendant promptly took steps to remove all references to the laser printer from all three websites. It was found that the plaintiffs must have known or realised that the offer did not express the true intention of the defendants. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:41 u want it for profit or personal use? The elements of an offer and acceptance are ex facie satisfied in every transaction asserted in the plaintiffs claims. He appears to have been in constant communication with the second plaintiff and to have received and read the mass e-mail from the first plaintiff after he placed his first purchase order. If the offeree knows that the offeror does not intend the terms of the offer to be those that the natural meaning of the words would suggest, he cannot, by purporting to accept the offer, bind the offeror to a contract: Hartog v Colin & Shields [1939] 3All ER 566; Smith v Hughes (1871) LR6 QB 597. The defendant is therefore entitled to recover in full its taxed costs from the plaintiffs. The common law has drawn the line in Bell v Lever Bros Ltd. Do you have a 2:1 degree or higher? It has been a fertile source of academic debate, but in practice it has given rise to a handful of cases that have merely emphasised the confusion of this area of our jurisprudence. He is described by his counsel in submissions as a prudent and careful person. He received this information through an sms message. The essence of snapping up lies in taking advantage of a known or perceived error in circumstances which ineluctably suggest knowledge of the error. 154 Interestingly, of the 784 persons who placed 1,008 orders for 4,086 laser printers, only these six plaintiffs have attempted to enforce their purported contractual rights. 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. There was also no indication that the product was being sold on promotion. Ltd.1 has the makings of a student's classic for several rea- Caveat emptor remains a cornerstone of the law of contract and business relationships. Often the essence of good business is the use of superior knowledge. Sometimes this is made explicit by judges; more often it is the implied basis of the courts decision.
Associated Press Email Address,
Slang Term For Manual Labor Codycross,
What Occupancy Type Is A Coffee Shop,
Articles C
