chwee kin keong v digilandmall high court

Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:17 what hp online?? In this case, Defendant was selling IT products over internet in Singapore. 89 In the circumstances, I had little hesitation in allowing the amendments sought by the defendant. Consideration was less than executory and non-existent. These statements are not to be interpreted as a clarion call to rewrite commercial agreements because of a partys unreasonable or ignoble behaviour. . Though he initially denied this in cross-examination, he had to accept this when confronted with his own e-mail as irrefutable evidence. Case name. 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!! Altogether different considerations may arise if a party, at a late stage, seeks through an amendment to adduce further evidence to support that same amendment. This has clearly caused much confusion in the common law jurisdictions. This is an area that needs to be rationalised in a coherent and structured manner. 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. 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. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:43 coz the HP laser colour printer sells for at least 3 to 4k outside, Desmond 13/01/20 01:44 from US I heard is about USD 2k, Desmond 13/01/20 01:44 its HP and Laser and Coloured. This can be before or during the trial, or after judgment or on appeal. The E-Mail Acceptance Rule. The High Court of Australia in Taylor v Johnson purportedly relied on Solle v Butcher, Bell v Lever Brothers, Limited [1932] AC 161, McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission (1951) 84CLR 377, all cases of common mistake, to suggest that in unilateral mistake a contracting party cannot assert, by relying on his own mistake, that a contract is void, notwithstanding the issue is fundamental or known to the other side. [2005] SGCA 2 - eLitigation Slade, in a well reasoned article written not long after Solle v Butcher was decided, asserted: In general, it is submitted that there are no cases which support the proposition that in cases of unilateral mistake, V [the enforcing party] may obtain this relief where the contract is not void at law and there has been no misrepresentation. Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball Case - 1840 Words | Bartleby Cases of fraud and misrepresentation, and undue influence, are all catered for under other existing and uncontentious equitable rules. This is approved in a Singaporean case, Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd . 55 The fourth plaintiff is technologically savvy and runs an Internet business with the second plaintiff. In common mistake, both parties make the same mistake. As a lawyer, he appears to have been indispensable in the plaintiffs attempts to hold the defendant to the bargain. Yet in other aspects, he could recollect, with crystal clear precision and clarity, details of what had transpired. Given its global reach and ever changing technological advancements, Internet usage will pose a myriad of issues for resolution. Two issues had arisen. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:24 huh?? In such cases, it would be unconscionable to enforce the bargain and equity will set aside the contract. Unfortunately, they mistakenly offered the price at so much per pound in place of so much per piece. Lord Phillips of Worth MatraversMR observed in a withering analysis at [156], [157], [160] and [161]: 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. Furthermore, they relied on a passage from, At the trial leave to amend particulars will as a rule be refused (, 84 It is axiomatic that a court will generally be cautious if not reluctant to effect any amendments once the hearing has commenced; even more so once the evidential phase of the proceedings has been completed. They were clearly anxious to place their orders before the defendant took steps to correct the error. Our conclusion is that it is impossible to reconcile Solle v Butcher with Bell v Lever Bros Ltd. This was also the practice in the trade. They are described by their counsel in submissions as risk takers, business minded and profit seeking. Such conduct is akin to that of an unscrupulous commercial predator seeking to take advantage of an error by an unsuspecting prey by pouncing upon it before the latter has an opportunity to react or raise a shield of defence. Having ascertained that the laser printer was being advertised at $66, he decided to undertake further online searches through Yahoo.com and Ebay.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 . Neither party raised any objections. 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. Decisions cannot be reconciled and expressions, terminology and phraseology in different decisions mean different things to different courts and even judges within the same judicial systems. 2 [2004] 2 SLR 594 ("the Digilandmall case") (The decision was very recently affirmed by the Singapore Court of Appeal in Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] SGCA 2, albeit on somewhat different grounds and where the focus was on the law of unilateral mistake rather than formation of contract.)]. 109 This cautious statement by Chitty needs to be carefully reconsidered in the context of recent developments in this area of law. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall Pte Ltd The defendant, Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd, were an online IT company that sold related software and hardware from Singapore. I do not accept that there were no discussions between them on the price posting being an error. 72 To effect the purchase transactions on the respective websites, the plaintiffs had to navigate through several web pages. Registered office: Creative Tower, Fujairah, PO Box 4422, UAE. Homestead Assets Sdn Bhd v. Contramec . The CISG has currently been adopted by 95 Contracting States world-wide. The decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in, 25 The law of mistake was discussed in depth by McLachlinCJBC in. 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. In addition, he despatched e-mails to the fourth and fifth plaintiffs attaching a hyperlink to the HP website. The decision of V.K. He somewhat muddied the authority of his observations by apparently accepting in Gallie v Lee [1969] 2 Ch 17 at 33 (affirmed on appeal in Saunders v Anglia Building Society [1971] AC 1004) that in Cundy v Lindsay there was no contract at all. 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" . 12 The plaintiffs both collectively and individually maintained adamantly that while they thought that the price of $66 appeared to be a good deal they did not think that the website prices had been mistakenly placed or inserted. 96 In an Internet sale, a prospective purchaser is not able to view the physical stock available. The prospective buyer has to make an offer to purchase which is then accepted by the merchant. He appeared distinctly uncomfortable during several phases of his cross-examination and his answers on crucial points were evasive and often vague.. His evidence in relation to the level and nature of communications he had with the second and third plaintiffs on the morning in question lacked candour. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:47 wasnt greedy before I tok to u. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:47 yeah.. S$1 mio then no need to work liao?? 120 The widening of jurisdiction to embrace a broad equitable jurisdiction could well encourage litigious behaviour and promote uncertainty. 153 These statements of jurisprudence are of cardinal importance in understanding and fashioning the law of contract. Chwee Kin Keong vs Digilandmall.com - Free download as Powerpoint Presentation (.ppt / .pptx), PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or view presentation slides online. . Though the six plaintiffs accounted for only 18 of these purchase orders, they figure prominently among the 11 individuals who ordered more than 50 laser printers. 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). The financial consequences could be considerable. by the earlier decision of Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com [2005] 1 SLR(R) 502, where the Court of Appeal recognised the doctrine of unilateral mistake in equity, departing from the English position in Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd [2003] QB 679; [2002] 3 WLR 1617; [2002] 4 All ER 689. V K Rajah JC. Indeed this appears to be the underlying rationale for the unique legal characteristics attributed to an invitation to treat; see Grainger & Son v Gough [1896] AC 325 at 333334, Esso Petroleum Ltd v Commissioners of Customs & Excise [1976] 1All ER 117 at 126. There were no such discussions with potential buyers. 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 . The other school of thought views the approach outlined earlier with considerable scepticism. Indeed, in difficult cases, the courts in several common law jurisdictions have gone to extraordinary lengths to conjure up consideration. They are tainted and unenforceable. 134 It is not really in issue that contracts can be effectively concluded over the Internet and that programmed computers sending out automated responses can bind the sender. Doctrines and Institutions of Responsible Government. Civil Procedure Pleadings . Claiming he was in a light-hearted kind of mood during his ICQ (acronym for I-Seek-You) conversation with Desmond, he insisted that this conversation should be taken neither seriously nor literally. PDF Emily M. Weitzenboeck, 2012 Norwegian Research Center for - UiO But it is difficult to see how that can apply here. There are, however, other sound reasons to argue against such a rule in favour of the recipient rule. 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. The case of Hartog v Colin & Shields [1939] 3All ER 566 is incontrovertibly the leading authority in this area. They have taken into account both the English and Australian authorities in distilling the jurisprudence in this area. In a Straits Times report dated 15January 2003 captioned $66 printer error angry customers seek lawyers help, it was reported that the second plaintiff, described as a network marketer had on 13January at about 2.00am stumbled upon a offer he could not believe $66 for a Hewlett Packard laserjet printer that normally sells for $3,854 before GST. 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. 74 Under product description on each webpage, instead of the actual description of the laser printer which in this case should have been HP9660A Color LaserJet 4600, only the numerals 55 appeared: this was the result of Samuel Teos earlier inadvertent input. 30th Sep 2021 Offer and acceptance - The analysis is structured around the The defendants argued this pricing was a unilateral mistake and that the complainants took advantage of this. He is described by his counsel in submissions as a prudent and careful person. 98 Once an offer is sent over the Internet, the sender loses control over the route and delivery time of the message. Chwee Kin Keong Vs | PDF - Scribd From time to time there will be cases where this is an overriding consideration. Merchants may find their contracts formed in foreign jurisdictions and therefore subject to foreign laws. In any event, it does not appear that she disclosed the whole truth of what she knew. The law may not imply a condition precedent as to the availability of stock simply to bail out an Internet merchant from a bad bargain, a fortiori in the sale of information and probably services, as the same constraints as to availability and supply may not usually apply to such sales. The Canadian and Australian cases have moved along with the eddies of unconscionability. The number of orders he placed was nothing short of brazen. Hwa Lai Heng Ricky v DBS Bank Ltd and another appeal and another Desmond: 13/01/20 01:44 if they dont honor it Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:45 sell me one lah name your price ;-) sue them lor , Desmond: 13/01/20 01:45 I think they will give vouchers or special deals. There was no satisfactory reason for the genesis of this e-mail (see [67] infra). 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. Court Determines if There's a Contract Existence - LawTeacher.net Different protocols may result in messages arriving in an incomprehensible form. In this case, there was no consensus ad idem or meeting of the minds between the parties, which meant that there could be no binding contract between them. So there is a contract and therefore the defendant is liable in breach of contract. They are all well-educated professionals articulate, entrepreneurial and, quite bluntly, streetwise and savvy individuals. Despite their familial relationship, the legal relationship between the two of them was that of agent and principal. 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]. 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 contract stands according to the natural meaning of the words used. He is currently self-employed and is intimately involved in the multi-level marketing sales of aromatherapy products under the Bel-Air label. 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.

Cootie Brown's Peach Pie Recipe, Restaurant Brands International Leadership Development Program Salary, Cancel Goodrx Gold, Locating And Anchoring The Vein, Articles C