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 . Such errors can be magnified almost instantaneously and may be harder to detect than if made in a face to face transaction or through physical document exchanges. 72 To effect the purchase transactions on the respective websites, the plaintiffs had to navigate through several web pages. Theoretically the supply of information is limitless. Philip Fong Yeng Fatt and Doris Chia Ming Lai (Harry Elias Partnership) for defendant, Chwee Kin Keong; Tan Wei Teck; Yeow Kinn Keong Mark; Ow Eng Hwee; Tan Chun Chuen Malcolm; Yeow Kinn Oei 61 The fifth plaintiff placed an order for 100 laser printers at about 3.51am. 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. Their conduct in pursuing their claims cannot by any stretch of the imagination be characterised as having the slightest colour of being legitimate regardless of whether the subjective or objective theories are applied and whether common law or equity is applied in adjudicating this matter. The modern approach in contract law requires very little to find the existence of consideration. A number of them have very close relationships, with some of them even sharing common business interests. The decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in, 25 The law of mistake was discussed in depth by McLachlinCJBC in. He graduated with an accounting degree from NTU. The fourth plaintiffs single transaction with the Digilandmall website was confirmed by a similar automated response stating Successful Purchase Confirmation from Digilandmall. Soon after, the second, third and fifth plaintiffs took their claims to the media. The unconstrained exchange that followed between the two is both revealing and compelling. 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. clout_case_500 - UNCITRAL Altogether he sought to purchase 760 units, the largest number of orders placed by anyone between 8 and 13January 2003. Secondly, widening the scope of mistake, unilateral or otherwise, under the rubric of equitable mistake will, with its malleability, only encourage uncertainty and litigation. To that extent, his evidence that he subsequently dismissed the notion altogether is unacceptable. It appears that it wanted to leave no stone unturned and had therefore mounted a root and branch attack on the plaintiffs claims. Administration law is the actions made by a government, which adversely affects an individual. Two issues had arisen. 133 It is however clear that the law should not take cognisance of bad bargains and misapprehension that do not affect a fundamental or essential aspect of a contractual relationship. In Chwee Kin Keong v . They have a common interest in bridge and this helped to cement their friendship. 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. "Unilateral Mistake at Common Law and in Equity" by Kelvin Fatt Kin LOW CISG-online | CISG-online.org The other school of thought views the approach outlined earlier with considerable scepticism. While this is the general principle for shop displays, it is open to a merchant to offer by way of an advertisement the mechanics of a unilateral or bilateral contract. He offered no plausible explanation for the series of orders which he placed while he was in communication with the other plaintiffs, other than stating audaciously that he had to buy a lot to sell a lot, to get a lot. Alarm bells would have sounded immediately. Chwee Kin Keong vs Digilandmall.com In addition to the law of (especially, unilateral) mistake, issues relating to the formation of a contract will be considered (including the law relating to offer and . CHWEE KIN KEONG v DIGILANDMALL.COM Pte Ltd (2005) SGCA 2. Offer and acceptance - The analysis is structured around the 127 The attempt to conflate the concept of common law mistake and the equitable jurisdiction over mistake is understandable but highly controversial. This is a matter perhaps best left to law reform rather than to incremental judge-made law which may sow the seeds of confusion and harvest the returns of uncertainty. The leading Canadian decision in this area is the case of, 120 The widening of jurisdiction to embrace a broad equitable jurisdiction could well encourage litigious behaviour and promote uncertainty. Normally the contract is only concluded when the acceptance is communicated by the offeree to the offeror. 109 This cautious statement by Chitty needs to be carefully reconsidered in the context of recent developments in this area of law. 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. 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. 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. Inflexible and mechanical rules lead to injustice. Any reasonable person, given the extent of the knowledge and information the plaintiffs were armed with, would have come to a similar conclusion. 101 RSS Intellectual Property Office of Singapore Expand/Collapse. When pressed why he asked MsToh to do this research, the fifth plaintiffs response was unsatisfactory. This is an area that needs to be rationalised in a coherent and structured manner. He was also involved in initiating the Channel NewsAsia report (see [78] and [79] infra). 36 The second plaintiff was the key person and pivotal in the entire chain of events. 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). 68 Yeow Kinn Oei is 29 years old and the brother of the third plaintiff. Thus the task of ascertaining whether the parties have reached agreement as to the terms of a contract can involve quite a complex amalgam of the objective and the subjective and involve the application of a principle that bears close comparison with the doctrine of estoppel. Because it was simply a matter of time before the error would inevitably be noticed and the pricing inevitably corrected. 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. The same view is echoed in Halsburys Laws of Singapore vol7 (Butterworths Asia, 2000) at [80.164]. It has been pointed out that the pedigree of these decisions is dubious, to say the least (see [128] and [129] infra). 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. 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. 44 He made his first purchase of ten laser printers at about 2.42am. China-Singapore "One Belt One Road" International Business Cases Digest Part 1 -"" () 457-463 (2020, published by the Singapore and People's Republic of China Supreme Courts . Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. 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" . 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. June Proctor, 1997, p. 13. e-Archive | SAcLJ | AP Journals Online Has an agreement been reached or not? In addition, Tan Cheng Peng, the girlfriend and business associate of the third plaintiff, filed an affidavit detailing her communications with him. [The Myth of Mistake in the English Law of Contract (1954) 70LQR 385 at 396]. He too affirmed from his searches that the normal price of the laser printer was in the region of US$2,000. The complainants argued that they were not aware that this price was a mistake and wanted the binding contract to be fulfilled. 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. 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. Ltd.1 has the makings of a student's classic for several reasons: it presents a textbook example of offer and acceptance; it is set in the context of internet contracting; it involves the use in evidence of email, instantaneous messaging, and short messaging system (SMS); and it . The second issue was raised by me and touched upon contentions made by both parties in their written submissions. He subsequently sent the web link to the Epinions website to the first and second plaintiffs. When considering the appropriate rule to apply, it stands to reason that as between sender and receiver, the party who selects the means of communication should bear the consequences of any unexpected events. 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 bites, however, may taste quite different and cause different sensations. The point is, there is a chasm between a clarification amendment and a new or distinct issue being raised at a later stage. The first issue dealt with references made by the plaintiffs to certain embargoed material. 77 Soon after the defendant informed the plaintiffs that they did not intend to deliver the laser printers, the plaintiffs took their claims to the press. http://www.epinions.com/HP_Color_LaserJet_4600_Series_Printer_Printers. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] - YouTube 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. The financial consequences could be considerable. The sixth plaintiff told his brother to order some for him, without specifying how many laser printers he wanted or how he intended to pay for the laser printers. The plaintiffs and the defendant later reached an agreement to dispense with any further oral evidence, save for that of Tan Cheng Peng. The leading Canadian decision in this area is the case of McMaster University v Wilchar Construction Ltd (1971) 22DLR(3d) 9 which, incidentally, was cited with approval by the Australian High Court in Taylor v Johnson. The decision of V.K. 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. In the Singapore context a similar approach has been adopted by the Court of Appeal in Aircharter World Pte Ltd v Kontena Nasional Bhd [1999] 3 SLR 1 at [30] and [31], and Projection Pte Ltd v The Tai Ping Insurance Co Ltd [2001] 2 SLR 399 at [15]. It cannot also be seriously argued that there was no intention to enter into a legal relationship. 60 Prior to placing his order, he was again contacted by the second plaintiff. 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. I cannot accept that. 49 Tan Cheng Pengs brief evidence did not really assist the third plaintiff. There can be no other reasonable explanation. Her evidence was inconsequential and did not assist the plaintiffs. After all, what would he do with 100 obsolete commercial laser printers? He also claimed to have talked to buyers in the market about reselling the laser printers and that the failure to procure the units would tarnish his reputation. Typical transactions are usually but not invariably characterised by (a)indecent alacrity; and (b)behaviour that any fair-minded commercial person similarly circumstanced would regard as a patent affront to commercial fairplay or morality. It is plain that the defendant had given careful consideration to this issue and was prepared to contract on the basis that it would be able to comply with any orders hence, there was no reference to any order being subject to stock availability. The payment mode opted for was cash on delivery. A prospective purchaser is entitled to rely on the terms of the web advertisement. These statements are not to be interpreted as a clarion call to rewrite commercial agreements because of a partys unreasonable or ignoble behaviour. This could account for the substantial number of Canadian cases in this area of the law. Both parties expressed that they wished to effect amendments to mirror evidence that had been adduced in the proceedings. Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball Case - 1840 Words | Bartleby Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd. Notwithstanding occasional failure, most e-mails arrive sooner rather than later. 63 It is pertinent he too made web searches using the Google search engine. PDF Emily M. Weitzenboeck, 2012 Norwegian Research Center for - UiO 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. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:25 ok but how come got such a good deal? After further sms exchanges, the second plaintiff contacted the fifth plaintiff on his mobile phone, urging him to return home to access the e-mail message he had just sent. Hwa Lai Heng Ricky v DBS Bank Ltd and another appeal and another 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. Websites often provide a service where online purchases may be made. Rather, in my opinion, constructive knowledge alone will suffice to invoke equitys conscience. This can be before or during the trial, or after judgment or on appeal. 73 The sixth plaintiffs orders did not receive matching confirmations from the defendant as his e-mail box was full. 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. 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. Similar works. As such, I would strongly appeal to you to reconsider your decision. 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. com Pte Ltd30 that was primarily about unilateral mistake. 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, 27 The first plaintiff obviously took the view that the advertisement should be acted upon urgently. The unusual product description of 55 which the fourth plaintiff alone reluctantly acknowledged as weird and unusual would have been a red light signal that an error had occurred. There is one important exception to this principle. Placing an advertisement on the Internet is essentially advertising or holding out to the world at large. 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. The e-mails had all the characteristics of an unequivocal acceptance. To my mind, the confirmation through the subsequent searches that the actual price of the laser printer was, in fact, US$2,000 would, if anything, have affirmed his belief that an error had occurred. This constituted more than a quarter of the total number of laser printers ordered. After receiving the e-mail from the first plaintiff, he visited the relevant HP website pages. 149 It is clear from the authorities reviewed that such a contract, if entered into by a party with actual or presumed knowledge of an error, is void from the outset. in the High Court decision of Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd,2 from the perspective of economics. 87 It appeared to me that the extract from Singapore Civil Procedure 2003 relied on by the plaintiffs was blindly lifted from earlier editions of the English White Book without any consideration as to how it dovetails with the present procedural climate.