Rules of court which are meant to facilitate the conduct of proceedings invariably encapsulate concepts of procedural fairplay. 2 Who is correct? 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. The later the amendment, the greater the adverse consequences. 25 The mass e-mail at 2.58am is cursorily dismissed by counsel for the plaintiffs as poor use of language that ought not to be taken literally in light of the early hours of the morning. At 4.15am, he sent an email to the first plaintiff, copied to the second plaintiff, with a happy emoticon following check out the prices here (see [19]. All previous discussions and negotiations between the parties proceeded on the basis of the price being fixed at so much per piece. Added to his own purchases of 760 units, he was effectively responsible for the purchase of 1,090 laser printers. But it is difficult to see how that can apply here. Therefore, administrative law encompasses Is the Right to Privacy Adequately Protected? 46 He was therefore aware, even before he made his first purchase, that the actual price of the laser printer was in the region of US$2,000. The individualistic ethic seeks to maximise individual goals and the community ethic seeks to set norms for commercial morality and to ensure that fair dealing and community cohesiveness are observed and maintained. Desmond: 13/01/20 01:47 u make me greedy, Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:47 ok lor if you insist . The modern approach in contract law requires very little to find the existence of consideration. I found his entire evidence relating to his communication with the first and other plaintiffs unsatisfactory and in many aspects incredulous. I do not accept that there were no discussions between them on the price posting being an error. 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. 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. Though the actual price of the laser printer was $3,854, the defendant had on 8January 2003 mistakenly posted the price at $66.00 on its websites. There were no such discussions with potential buyers. First, it is clear that the line of Australian and Canadian cases have broadened their equitable jurisdiction on the strength of dicta attributable principally to Lord Denning. 39 The sequence of orders placed by the second plaintiff in the short space of an hour and a half deserves some mention. 72 To effect the purchase transactions on the respective websites, the plaintiffs had to navigate through several web pages. 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. This e-mail was sent only after the first plaintiff had made his own Internet searches on the pricing of the laser printer. 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). 117 It should be emphasised that this stream of authority is consistently recognised by all the major common law jurisdictions. In Associated Japanese Bank (International) Ltd v Credit du NordSA [1989] 1 WLR 255 at 266, Lord DenningMRs views were doubted and described as reflecting an individual opinion by SteynJ (as he then was). 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. Nor could he satisfactorily explain why he initially made the Internet searches to ensure the offer was genuine. Keywords Contract Online Store Mistake Pricing Mistake Citation I granted leave to both parties to file applications to amend the pleadings. 45 The most telling aspect of the third plaintiffs evidence is his admission that he made Internet searches relating to the pricing of the laser printer, immediately after he was contacted by the first plaintiff. Desmond intimated that the defendant would give vouchers or special deals as a matter of equitable compensation should it not honour the purchase orders. This may have created formatting or alignment issues. In submissions, his counsel attempted to play down the significance of both this conversation as well as the mass e-mail. The E-Mail Acceptance Rule. He claims visiting, 62 Like the second plaintiff, the fifth plaintiff played a pivotal role in the events leading to these proceedings. 75 Each of the automated confirmatory e-mail responses carried under Availability of product the notation call to enquire. . He offered to buy a laser printer from Desmond at double the price, that is $132. I reject this. They were selling a HP laser printer and an employee accidently made a mistake as to the price of the printer on their website. [2005] 1 SLR (R) Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd 507 printers. While these contentions were well within the scope of the evidence adduced and their respective lines of cross-examination, they appeared to transgress their respective pleadings. 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 number of orders he placed was nothing short of brazen. Date of Verdicts: 12 April 2004, 13 January 2005. The sender will usually receive a prompt response. Where either mutual or unilateral mistake is pleaded, the very existence of agreement is denied. It is not in dispute that the defendant made a genuine error. The programme trigger on that website automatically and instantaneously initiated the insertion of similar contents onto all three websites. I cannot accept that. Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2004] 2 SLR(R) 594, Rajah JC (as . It may be impractical and unjust to demand that the mistaken party actually prove the knowledge of a substantial number of people who effect numerous purchases. It presents a textbook example of offer and acceptance. The plaintiffs also assert in their submissions that if contracts are only upheld if parties acted honourably there would be very few contracts left standing in the commercial world. 144 I find, in the alternative, that the plaintiffs, given each of their backgrounds, would in any event, each have separately realised and appreciated, before placing their purchase orders, that a manifest mistake had occurred even if no communications on the error had taken place between them. The court held that the acceptance has been completed once it is posted although here, the defendants actually did not receive the letter before they sold it to someone else. 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. They were clearly anxious to place their orders before the defendant took steps to correct the error. A party may not snap at an obviously mistaken offer: McMaster. There cannot be any legitimate expectation of enforcement on the part of the non-mistaken party seeking to take advantage of appearances. 90 After leave was granted to amend the defence, each of the plaintiffs filed a further short affidavit refuting knowledge of the mistake relating to pricing. Arrival can also be immaterial unless a recipient accesses the e-mail, but in this respect e-mail does not really differ from mail that has to be opened. 96 In an Internet sale, a prospective purchaser is not able to view the physical stock available. Chwee Kin Keong and others v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] 1 SLR(R) 502; [2005] SGCA 2. 93 Website advertisement is in principle no different from a billboard outside a shop or an advertisement in a newspaper or periodical. The reason for this inconsistent conduct surfaced later. [emphasis added]. Basic principles of contract law continue to prevail in contracts made on the Internet. A steady stream of decisions from common law courts indicate a measured but nevertheless distinctly incremental willingness to extend the scope of the exception to not just actual knowledge, but deemed or constructive knowledge as well. The payment mode opted for was cash on delivery. The jurisdiction asserted in the former case has not developed. After the defendant intimated that it would not be delivering the laser printer, he sent an e-mail excoriating it, asserting, inter alia: Myself, and other people who have been disappointed by you decision, will definitely spread word of the companys lack of honour and integrity to everyone we know and all over the internet! At 4.15am, he sent an email to the first plaintiff, copied to the second plaintiff, with a happy emoticon following check out the prices here (see [19] supra). In short, where does the justice reside? 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. In any event, it does not appear that she disclosed the whole truth of what she knew. 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 In the fifth plaintiffs affidavit evidence, he asserted emphatically and unequivocally that at no point did I ever think that the price of the printers were a mistake. 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 rationale for this is that a court will not sanction a contract where there is no consensus ad idem and furthermore it will not allow, as in the case of unilateral mistake, a non-mistaken party to take advantage of an error which he is or ought to be conscious of. 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. This was also the practice in the trade. Mistakes that negative consent do not inexorably result in contracts being declared void. He graduated from NTU as a bachelor of business studies, specialising in financial analysis. His evidence pertaining to the material points of knowledge and his communications with the other plaintiffs lacked credibility. 118 The Canadian courts have been the most active common law courts explicating and developing this area of the law. The e-mail was given a high importance priority and captioned go load it now!!. 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. Unilateral Mistake at . Olley v Marlborough Court [1949] 1 KB 532 Omnium D'Enterprises v . 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 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. They are tainted and unenforceable. Rajah J.C. in the Singapore High Court in Chwee Kin Keong v. Digilandmall.com Pte. The fact that it may have been negligent is not a relevant factor in these proceedings. They assumed that to be the position. Thus, 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. The payment mode selected by the third plaintiff was cash on delivery. In these circumstances we can see no option but so to hold. Do you have a 2:1 degree or higher? u think this is the 1970s?? 126 The Australian courts appear to have relied on the views of Lord DenningMR in Solle v Butcher to establish a wholly different doctrinal approach to mistake and have purportedly applied a fused concept of law and equity to the law on mistake. Chwee Kin Keong v Digilandmall.com Pte Ltd [2005] 1 SLR 502: [2005] SGCA 2 Context: This Case deals with the issue of unilateral mistake. It is, in large measure, determined by making an objective appraisal of the exchanges between the parties. As for the common law on unilateral mistake, it is claimed that the acid test for its application is not satisfied. This thread helps to rationalise the development of the common law but ought not to be viewed as supporting the existence of a general test of commercial morality tantamount to the test of unconscionability invoked by equity. Administration law is the actions made by a government, which adversely affects an individual. If stock of a product has been exhausted, a prospective purchaser cannot sue for specific performance or damages as he has merely made an offer that has not been accepted by the merchant. It stands to reason that if a party shuts its eyes to the obvious, the party is being neither honest nor reasonable, and ought to be affixed with knowledge. The second plaintiff made an enquiry as to the terms and conditions governing purchases through the HP website while the fifth plaintiff was perusing the conditions of the Digilandmall website. Scorpio: 13/01/20 01:25 ok but how come got such a good deal? Alarm bells would have sounded immediately. He holds an accounting degree from NTU. 27 The first plaintiff obviously took the view that the advertisement should be acted upon urgently. The non-mistaken partys appreciation that there is no real offer on the contracts literal terms undermines the basis of the objective theory and necessarily imports the lack of subjective intention on the part of the mistaken party. The shopping cart website page carried the insertion call to enquire under the heading Availability of product. It is significant that some of the plaintiffs had never made any prior Internet purchases before that eventful morning. 73 The sixth plaintiffs orders did not receive matching confirmations from the defendant as his e-mail box was full. This e-mail was sent only, 29 The first plaintiff struck me as an opportunistic entrepreneur. He is also part of the Bel-Air network. 42 Mark Yeow Kinn Keong has a Bachelor of Science (Economics) degree from the University of London. The fourth plaintiff duly accessed the e-mail the second plaintiff had sent him pursuant to their conversation. I do not accept that there were no discussions between them on the price posting being an error. Where common mistake is pleaded, the presence of agreement is admitted. Someone referred me to the HP website which shows the price of this HP Colour LaserJet 4600 Series as S$66.00. There are, however, other sound reasons to argue against such a rule in favour of the recipient rule. (See for example the approach in Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1990] 1AllER 512.)