fullfilled by amazon prime

unholyangel

Mr_Norrell wrote: »

I don't think Hartog fits either, personally. The key in Hartog was that it was a mistake in communication. The standard pre contract negotiations had specified "per piece", while in the contract it was written "per pound", and the court ruled that the claimants must have known it wasn't the defendant intention to sell "per pound" due to all the prior negotiations stating "per piece".

I think you could distinguish Hartog, but perhaps there's another case that deals with facts similar to the OP. There's certainly an article that does: "Mistakes in contracts", Buyer 2005, Oct, 4-6 - but I can't view it to see what it says.

Theres been a case to the contrary - where a guy won against a price drop tv channel - and the reason he won was because it was not an obvious mistake - since the channel regularly sold goods at such low prices.

frugal_mike

sunnyD1 wrote: »

entering into a contract. Not a completed contract.

I'm not sure what you mean by completing the contract, but it was my understanding that contracts conclude at the point they become binding (conclusion of the contract negotiations). Before this point either side is free to pull out with no penalty. After this point they are bound by the terms of the contract.

But I assume you're talking about the point where the contract has been fully enacted and there is nothing else for either party to do. If so, then these contracts are most definitely not completed. The Sale of Goods Act forms part of the contract, and that puts obligations on the seller for up to 6 years. The contract (if not void) is very much still alive.

Mr_Norrell

unholyangel wrote: »

Theres been a case to the contrary - where a guy won against a price drop tv channel - and the reason he won was because it was not an obvious mistake - since the channel regularly sold goods at such low prices.

Cool, that sounds better than Hartog, have you got a case citation or something I can read?

unholyangel

Mr_Norrell wrote: »

Cool, that sounds better than Hartog, have you got a case citation or something I can read?

I'm trying to recall the names involved. Were a few cases surrounding that tv channel (was madbid) but one in particular had the judgement uploaded online and went into detail about the mistake and that because they regularly sold goods at such discounts, it was not a mistake the buyer could have been aware of so the contract was valid. It was county court though so no precedent.

So if the sellers in question regularly sell those items for 1p.....then the seller would have no comeback. But we already know from the OP himself that they suspected it was a mistake.