[18] The counsel for the plaintiff urged this Court to follow the principle of law as laid down in the case of Hartog v. Colin & Shields [1939] 3 All ER 566, and cited the following passage from the judgment:

"The Plaintiffs must have known that the offer did not express the true intention of the Defendants and that the apparent contract was therefore void. The Plaintiff could not reasonably have supposed that the offer expressed the real intention of the persons making it, and must have known it to have been made by mistake. The Plaintiff did not, by his acceptance of the offer, make a binding contract with the Defendants."

[19] I have perused the judgment of Singleton J from the King's Bench Division and the principles laid down in Hartog v. Colin Shields,and I found the counsel for the plaintiff's reliance on the case was misconceived.

[20] In Hartog v. Colin Shields, the defendants contracted to sell to the plaintiff 30,000 Argentine hare skins. The defendants made a mistake in his offer by offering to sell the hare skins at certain prices per pound (by the weight) instead of prices per piece. Negotiation took place prior to the sale, and reference had always been made to the pric