In Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd ,1 one of the defendant's employees mistakenly uploaded the contents of a training template onto the defendant's website, resulting in the retail price of S$3,854 for a commercial laser printer on the website being replaced with the figure S$66. They have taken into account both the English and Australian authorities in distilling the jurisprudence in this area. The decision of V.K. The evidence incontrovertibly indicates that the first plaintiff himself entertained this view for the entire period he was in communication with the second and third plaintiffs. In addition, each of the confirmatory e-mail responses states at the outset: [W]e will be calling you in the near future to deliver the products to the address shown below. 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. In other words, he really wanted to ascertain the true price of the laser printer. 152 This view has also found support in the Singapore context. Has an agreement been reached or not? By their own admission, they made Internet searches through various search engines to ascertain the profits they could make. Merchants may find their contracts formed in foreign jurisdictions and therefore subject to foreign laws. 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. He is currently employed as an accountant in an accounting firm, Ernst & Young. 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. 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. 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. The defendant is therefore entitled to recover in full its taxed costs from the plaintiffs. The defendant programmed the software. This provision acknowledges that the essential framework of an electronic contract needs to be considered in the usual manner; in other words, principles of contract formation, consideration, terms and conditions, choice of law and jurisdictional issues need to be examined. He in effect forwarded the first plaintiffs e-mail to them. I was neither impressed nor convinced. As the reports contradict portions of their present evidence, they have indirectly tried to cast doubt on the accuracy of the reports in so far as the reports referred to them. 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. 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. This cannot be right. 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. In fact, he and the fourth plaintiff have jointly conceptualised and implemented an Internet-related business. 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. His evidence pertaining to the material points of knowledge and his communications with the other plaintiffs lacked credibility. I categorically reject their evidence in so far as it attempts to hermetically compartmentalise their knowledge and discussions. 47 Not content with making his own purchases, he woke up his brother and transacted 330 units on his behalf. This, in a nutshell, is the issue at the heart of these proceedings. The product descriptions in all the other pages of the respective websites, at the material time, carried a full detailed description of all advertised products. The plaintiffs refute that the error exonerates the defendant; they insist that a concluded contract is sacrosanct and must be honoured. 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 . 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. This has clearly caused much confusion in the common law jurisdictions. 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. 62 Like the second plaintiff, the fifth plaintiff played a pivotal role in the events leading to these proceedings. 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. 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. Chwee KIN Keong AND Others v Digilandmall.COM PTE LTD [2004 ] SGHC 71 paginator.book page 594 tuesday, november 2009 7:05 am 594 singapore law reports (reissue . The present article analyses the many important issues that are raised by what is probably the first case on Internet mistake - the Singapore High Court decision of Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR 594. This view seems to suggest that principles of equity invariably provide an equally strong but more elastic second string to the bow. 7 At about 3.36pm, Samuel Teo, an employee of DIL, inadvertently uploaded the contents of the training template onto the Digiland commerce website operated by DIL, in place of the test website allocated for the training. This e-mail was sent only, 29 The first plaintiff struck me as an opportunistic entrepreneur. 4 The defendant is a company that sells information technology (IT) related products over the Internet to consumers. Abstract The decision of V.K. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:33 how many u intend to get? It is important not to force into a Procrustean bed principles that have to be modified or discarded when considering novel aspects of the Internet. There is often, but not inexorably, a co-relationship between the timing when the amendment is sought and the adverse consequences for the other party. He opted to pay for all his purchases by cash on delivery. hahaha means S$132, Desmond 13/01/20 01:43 even $500 is a steal. The issue in this case was whether the pricing was a mistake and if the contract would be fulfilled. The most recent and authoritative pronouncement in this area (. What is urged is that, owing to a common error as to some fundamental fact, the agreement is robbed of all efficacy. Introduction The decision of V.K. The payment mode opted for was cash on delivery. Having pointed out 6 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 . As such, I would strongly appeal to you to reconsider your decision. Offer and acceptances have to reach an intended recipient to be efective. 127 The attempt to conflate the concept of common law mistake and the equitable jurisdiction over mistake is understandable but highly controversial. Not all one-sided transactions or bargains are improper. This contention is wholly untenable. The first plaintiffs riposte, should such a situation come to pass, was to sue them lor. Loose language may result in inadvertently establishing contractual liability to a much wider range of purchasers than resources permit. I do not accept that there were no discussions between them on the price posting being an error. Indeed he had conduct of significant phases of these proceedings on behalf of the plaintiffs. I granted leave to both parties to file applications to amend the pleadings. High Court Suit No 202 of 2003. The following excerpt is particularly significant and compelling: 23 The subsequent exchange further clarifies that the first plaintiff was fully conscious of the potential profit element arising from the purchase of a substantial number of the laser printers. Leave was also given to the plaintiffs to adduce further evidence, if they so desired. 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. 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. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. He was amicus curiae to the Court of Appeal of Singapore in the case of Chwee Kin Keong & Ors v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd, the leading Singapore case on unilateral mistake in the digital environment. Chwee Kin K eong and others . Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd,( [2005]SGCA 2 ) . Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:42 I want at least one for personal use 2 would be good coz my gf needs one too any more than that would be a bonus ;-), Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:43 anyway, I dont mind buying over if you have frens who want to sell buy at twice the price!! He would make some basic enquiries to ascertain whether there is anything faulty with the product in an attempt to seek an explanation for or understanding of the basis for the price discrepancy; he might alternatively try and ascertain whether perhaps the price differential is part of some spectacular promotional exercise. I found his entire evidence relating to his communication with the first and other plaintiffs unsatisfactory and in many aspects incredulous. 55 The fourth plaintiff is technologically savvy and runs an Internet business with the second plaintiff. The modern approach in contract law requires very little to find the existence of consideration. 105 It is not only reasonable but right that the objective appearance of a contract should not operate in favour of a party who is aware, in the eyes of the law, of the true state of affairs when, for instance, there is real misapprehension on the part of the mistaken party and when the actual reality of the situation is starkly obvious. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:25 ok but how come got such a good deal? Placing an advertisement on the Internet is essentially advertising or holding out to the world at large. 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. 48 The third plaintiff annexed to his affidavit the transcript of the Channel NewsAsia report where he was quoted. Examples of such mistakes would include (a)human error (b)programming of software errors and (c)transmission problems in the communication systems. 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. CHWEE KIN KEONG and Others v DIGILANDMALL.COM Pte Ltd (2004) 2 SLR 594. 43 After receiving a call from the first plaintiff at about 2.00am informing him that he had found an opportunity to make money as there was an arbitrage position to be achieved for some Hewlett Packard printers, the third plaintiff duly accessed his e-mail and visited the HP website. 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 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. There is therefore no pre-condition in law for a mistaken party to show an absence of carelessness to avail himself of this defence; the law precludes a person from seeking to gain an advantage improperly in such circumstances. Chwee Kin Keong decision - Chwee Kin Keong and Others v Digilandmall Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR 594; - Studocu Caso chwee kin keong and others digilandmall.com pte ltd slr sghc 71 suit no: suit decision 12 apr 2004 date: court: coram: counsel: high court rajah jc tan sok IgnorarExperimenta 'Pergunta a um Especialista' Pergunta a um especialista In some unusual circumstances where a unilateral mistake exists, the law can find a contract on terms intended by the mistaken party. There are in this connection two schools of thought. Not all one-sided transactions or bargains are improper. 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. Alarm bells would have sounded immediately. Case law Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmallcom Pte Ltd suggests that General Rule. Chwee Kin Keong and others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] 1 SLR(R) 502; [2005] SGCA 2. It appears that he was also in touch with the fifth plaintiff as evidenced by an e-mail sent later that morning by the fifth plaintiff to both him and the second plaintiff containing research, 52 He then called the second plaintiff on his handphone and informed him that he intended to purchase 50 laser printers. It is essential that the law be perceived as embodying rationality and fairness while respecting the commercial imperative of certainty. Here are some examples of case citations for other jurisdictions. Websites often provide a service where online purchases may be made. It appears that it wanted to leave no stone unturned and had therefore mounted a root and branch attack on the plaintiffs claims. It is not in dispute that the defendant made a genuine error. 44 He made his first purchase of ten laser printers at about 2.42am. The relevant text reads: WHILE surfing the Net at about 2am on Monday, MrTan Wei Teck stumbled upon an offer he could not believe $66 for a Hewlett Packard laserjet printer that normally sells for $3,854 before GST. . The text of the e-mail further reinforces the point. COOKE v OXLEY (1790) 3 T. R. 653. 89 In the circumstances, I had little hesitation in allowing the amendments sought by the defendant. 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 . In doing so, they appear to have also conflated equitable and common law concepts. Despite their familial relationship, the legal relationship between the two of them was that of agent and principal. This is an inane argument. From time to time there will be cases where this is an overriding consideration. The other knows, or must be taken to know, of his mistake. In submissions, his counsel attempted to play down the significance of both this conversation as well as the mass e-mail. The second issue was raised by me and touched upon contentions made by both parties in their written submissions. 112 Phang ([106] supra, at 418) rightly observes: It must be stressed that, in this context, a man is taken to have known what would have been obvious to a reasonable person in the light of the surrounding circumstances. The quintessential approach of the law is to preserve rather than to undermine contracts. The caption in each of the e-mails Successful Purchase Confirmation from HP online says it all. It is, in large measure, determined by making an objective appraisal of the exchanges between the parties. No rights can pass to third parties. He placed another order for a further 150 printers at 3.14am, followed by two further orders for 300 printers each at about 3.56am and 3.59am. 49 Tan Cheng Pengs brief evidence did not really assist the third plaintiff. He received this information through an sms message. He is currently self-employed and is intimately involved in the multi-level marketing sales of aromatherapy products under the Bel-Air label. But there would have, at least, to be some real reason to suppose the existence of a mistake before it could be incumbent on one party to question whether another party meant what he or she said. 79 The second, third and fifth plaintiffs tried their best to distance themselves from the quotes attributed to them. Other Jurisdictions. Some of the plaintiffs appeared rather coy or ignorant in this regard but I did not find their performance believable. 100 There is however another statute that ought to be taken into consideration in determining the appropriate default rule in e-commerce transactions. But that, surely, is a question as to where the common law should draw the line; not whether, given the common law rule, it needs to be mitigated by application of some other doctrine. The first and fifth plaintiffs ordered exactly a hundred laser printers each. Thus, while the idea of snapping up may well apply in cases one side is aware of the other sides error, I do not think it can be applied literally in the constructive knowledge cases. 38 The second plaintiff came across as intelligent and resourceful. David Baxter Edward Thomas and Peter Sandford Gander v BPE Solicitors (a firm) [2010] EWHC 306 (Ch) Dunlop v Higgins (1848) 1 HLC 381. 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. 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 . He has incorporated an Internet business Dreamcupid in which the second plaintiff has an interest. In addition, he despatched e-mails to the fourth and fifth plaintiffs attaching a hyperlink to the HP website. The e-mails sent at 2.34am were also captioned Go load it now! While the first plaintiff was the source of the information concerning the price posting, the second plaintiff actively communicated with all of the plaintiffs (save the sixth plaintiff), throughout the material period. It is an important subject for the future development of English contract law. 20 Annexed to this e-mail was the first plaintiffs earlier mass e-mail. Caveat emptor remains a cornerstone of the law of contract and business relationships. I note that there have been powerful arguments made to the contrary. NZULR, vol. He was aware that the laser printers were targeted for business use. The pleadings, in such instances, merely formalise what is already before the court. Between 3.13am and 4.00am the second plaintiff revisited the website four times placing four further orders for 20 laser printers each time. Date of Verdicts: 12 April 2004, 13 January 2005. 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. He claims visiting, 62 Like the second plaintiff, the fifth plaintiff played a pivotal role in the events leading to these proceedings. ! with its importance set at high. 42 Mark Yeow Kinn Keong has a Bachelor of Science (Economics) degree from the University of London. 113 The English Court of Appeal in Commission for the New Towns v Cooper (Great Britain) Ltd [1995] Ch 259, a case of common mistake, imported the concept of Nelsonian knowledge and applied the framework of various categories of knowledge outlined by Peter GibsonJ in Baden v Societe Generale pour Favoriser le Developpement du Commerce et de lIndustrie en FranceSA [1993] 1 WLR 509. Theoretically the supply of information is limitless. The defendants argued this pricing was a unilateral mistake and that the complainants took advantage of this. The defendant, on the other hand, contends that the law should not penalise a party who has unwittingly and genuinely made a unilateral mistake which was known or ought to have been known by the plaintiffs. This new template was designed to facilitate instantaneous price changes allowing them to be simultaneously reflected in the relevant Internet web pages. 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. v . They have a common interest in bridge and this helped to cement their friendship. There are two types of orders relevant: market orders and limit orders. June 16, 2022; Posted by why do chavs wear tracksuits; 16 . What amounts to snapping up is a question of degree that will incorporate a spectrum of contextual factors: what is objectively and subjectively known, the magnitude of the transaction(s), the circumstances in which the orders are placed and whether any unusual factors are apparent. Indeed, the time may have come for the common law to shed the pretence of searching for consideration to uphold commercial contracts. He is also described as the sole proprietor and manager of two other businesses that provide business support and consultancy. Why? Reference this It is simply inconceivable that when he entered into the purchase transaction, he did not know, or at the very least did not have a real and abiding belief that the price posting was an error. The purpose of the amendments was merely to regularise the pleadings and indeed they went no further than to summarise evidence and submissions that had already been raised. Following closely to the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong & Others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR 594 as a precedent with similar context, the court would most likely try to determine if there is an existence of a contract or if an agreement has been reached in the first place, so we refer to Lord Phillips in Shogun Finance Ltd v (See for example the approach in Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1990] 1AllER 512.) 5 A related website for corporate clients and re-sellers (the Digiland commerce website) is owned and operated by a related entity, Digiland International Limited (DIL). I invited both parties to indicate if they wished to amend their pleadings. 13 The first plaintiff, Chwee Kin Keong, is 29 years old. This is not a case about bargain hunting which is a time honoured and perfectly legitimate pursuit. There can be no other reasonable explanation. Ltd. Yeo Tiong Min* I. A court is not likely to take a sympathetic view of such manner of amendment. The Canadian and Australian cases have moved along with the eddies of unconscionability. Once again, however, this does not deprive E of his legal remedies; nor does it avail V if he wishes to recover property which he may have transferred under the contract. 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 . 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. Palm tree justice will only serve to inject uncertainty into the law. Consideration was less than executory and non-existent. Homestead Assets Sdn Bhd v. Contramec . This gives their courts a broad and elastic jurisdiction to deal with commercially inappropriate behaviour. http://www.epinions.com/HP_Color_LaserJet_4600_Series_Printer_Printers. . 93 Website advertisement is in principle no different from a billboard outside a shop or an advertisement in a newspaper or periodical. This price was much lower than the actual retail price, and had been posted on the defendant's website by mistake. In Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR (R) 594 (" Digilandmall.com "), the plaintiffs concerned placed orders over the Internet for a total of 1,606 Hewlett Packard commercial laser printers on the defendant (seller's) websites. The jurisdiction asserted in the former case has not developed. The defendant even had its terms and conditions posted on its website. One of the few cases on electronic contract formation in Singapore was Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall. 67 MsToh subsequently did some research on how companies which had committed similar mistakes over the Internet handled the aftermath. They are all well-educated professionals articulate, entrepreneurial and, quite bluntly, streetwise and savvy individuals. 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. CLARK, B. This is a disingenuous contention that desperately attempts to palliate their conduct in the subject transactions. Basic principles of contract law continue to prevail in contracts made on the Internet. 51 The fourth plaintiff received a phone call from the second plaintiff at about 2.00am, informing him that there was money to be made through the purchase of laser printers. The complainants had ordered over 100 printers each at this price. He acknowledged having had conversations with the other plaintiffs about how much money we can sell the printer and how much we can make and about storage space as well as how many units we intend to buy. 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 Nor should parties regard pleadings as assuming an amoeba-like nature, susceptible to constant reshaping. The financial consequences could be considerable. They are not entitled to the costs of the subsequent brief hearing, for reasons I now deal with summarily. Mistakes are usually synonymous with the existence of carelessness on the part of the mistaken party. Given his professional and business background, he must have realised that the $66 price posting on the HP website was an error. There is no merit at all in this contention. The recipient rule is therefore more convenient and relevant in the context of both instantaneous or near instantaneous communications. The case involved the sale of printers by the defendant at a price of S$66. 28 In any event, the first plaintiffs commercial background and business experience alone would have amply alerted him to the likelihood of the pricing being a mistake, even without his conversation with Desmond. Rather, in my opinion, constructive knowledge alone will suffice to invoke equitys conscience. Being fully conscious of the pivotal nature of this point, I have duly accorded particular attention to the evidence and credibility of each of the plaintiffs. Before dealing with the point of real substance, it is appropriate to briefly deal with two of the less meritorious contentions advanced. But it is difficult to see how that can apply here. 101 The applicable rules in relation to transactions over the worldwide web appear to be clearer and less controversial. The web page entitled checkout order confirmation had a notation stating the earliest date on which we can deliver all the products to you is based on the longest estimated time of stock availability plus the delivery lead time. 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 Bell v Lever Bros Ltd [1932] AC 161 and Solle v Butcher. 135 The defendant however asserts that there were no concluded contracts with any of the plaintiffs on a number of grounds. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR 594; [2004] SGHC 71. http://www.buy.hp.com.sg/hp/StandardProduct.cfm?prodid=HPC9960A. A prospective purchaser is entitled to rely on the terms of the web advertisement. Even if it were to be held that there is now a general test of unconscionability applicable to all types of mistake, the plaintiffs contentions will not take them far. 16 When the first plaintiff eventually succeeded in accessing the HP website, he immediately placed an order for 100 laser printers at about 2.05am, charging the transaction to his credit card. There are persuasive arguments against extending the litmus test of unconscionability to all mistake-type situations. It is pertinent to note that she placed orders for 32 laser printers including 20 units she ordered on behalf of her sister. 115 There is a distinct line of cases within the narrow confines of unilateral mistake where the common law has been resolutely disinclined to enforce apparent contracts. The first plaintiffs callname in this exchange is Scorpio. 27-30 January; 2-6, 9 February; 13 March; 12 April 2004 .

Joe And Irina Rolls Royce Chicago, Kannapolis City Council Members, Lytham Crematorium Funeral Times Today, Can You Shoot A Hunting Dog On Your Property, Dhi Mortgage Down Payment Assistance, Articles C