In Australia, An Ebay Sale is a Sale
syousef writes "An eBay sale is a sale says an Australian New South Wales State Judge in a case where a man tried to reneg on the Ebay sale of a 1946 World War II Wirraway aircraft. The seller tried to weasel out of the deal because he'd received a separate offer $100,000 greater than the Ebay sale price. The buyer who had bid the reserve price of $150,000 at the last minute took him to court. 'It follows that, in my view, a binding contract was formed between the plaintiff and the defendant and that it should be specifically enforced,' Justice Rein said in his decision." I haven't found anything like this in previous discussions; have there been similar decisions like this handed down in the US, Canada, or Europe?
The legal status of auctions considerably pre-dates electricity, much less the web. I have a feeling that if you tried to argue that there was some difference between a web auction and a traditional auction in a US court, you'd get pretty much the same result this guy did.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Once the auction is complete, it's a sale. Sales are sales, and cannot be reversed after the fact without willingness of both parties, or extenuating circumstances such as a faulty product.
What you're talking about (e.g. "No, you can't have another beer") would actually be the pre-sale negotiations. After the money has been handed over in a store and accepted, the sale has been started. So the bartender had better either give you your beer, or have a good reason under contract law for not doing so. (e.g. If a contract is impossible to fulfill, it can often be reversed. For example: If I sold you a beer, but another employee just drew the last pint for another customer, I would return you your money as it's now impossible for me to give you the beer you ordered.)
The big difference between a bar and eBay is that the contract is agreed to by both parties as soon as the auction ends. Thus the money doesn't have to change hands before the contract goes into effect. This is similar to a sit-down restaurant where you order and consume your food prior to paying. As soon as you order and your order is accepted, the contract is in effect. You imply that you agree to pay for your meal when you order.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Ah, legalese often confuses non-lawyers, and for good reason...its highly technical and specific.
An auction is a *type* of sale. The auction itself is merely a method of attaining a price. The contract of sale is created on the falling of the auctioneer's hammer, or similar event. If a reserve price is not reached, the goods may be sold to the highest bidder, or withdrawn. Whether or not an online 'auction' falls under the common law definition of an auction is highly dependent upon each country's law...and in this case, I believe the judge says that it does, which might be a departure from existing Australian Common Law.
The interesting thing about this case is that the Judge gave the winner the airplane. Usually, if you win a court case like this, you only get money damages unless the goods are unique or very rare. A World War II Wirraway plane, 1 of 5 left in the world, certainly qualifies for the legal remedy of "specific performance".
I find this interesting. If you advertise something for sale, shouldn't you have to sell it? Not everywhere, apparently.
Nearly all the firearms-specific versions of EBay, like gunbroker.com, are filled with offerings of used guns that basically say "Subject to prior sale. I'm putting up this web page but if someone comes in my shop and gives me money, you're out of luck. If I decide I don't like you, you're out of luck." This strikes me as quite unfair and unprofessional.
Even some professional-looking web sites that sell things don't really offer them for sale. If you go to Charles Double Reed looking for a new bassoon to purchase, you can't just put it in your shopping cart and send them money. Oh, no. The disclaimer ("Clicking the add to my cart button below does not guarantee that this instrument will be available to you.") makes it clear that they get to decide if you're the kind of person they want to do business with.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I've seen those "No shoes, no shirt, no service" signs. I realize sellers have a right to decide who they want to do business with. But this whole business of offering things for sale and then jerking them back at the last second, seemingly at random, just strikes me as symbolic of a "I don't have to follow any nominal rules of social interaction; I make my own" mindset that seems more and more common these days.
Are people just getting ruder, stupider, and prouder of it?
A seller can only cancel an auction. Bidders cant.
and as a bidder you are at the whims of the seller until the closing price and bid has been accepted then it's a legal and binding contract.
As a seller I can screw with you all I want cancel and relist auctions every time I see you as winning bidder. I have to pay for every relisting though, so it's not free.
Only the idiots that do not know how to use ebay do that crap. But then I also feel that only the dummies that do not know what an auction is use the stupid "reserve" system. I will not bid on any item that has a reserve, if you dont have the balls to put an item out for the price you want for it then dont list it.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
It's perfectly legal to do that, as the "sale" hasn't officially happened yet. It's a bit tricky with auctions, since the official sale happens when the auction ends, while in regular retail sales, it happens when money is exchanged. Perhaps the closest analogy happens for say, e-commerce. You buy an item, but the seller decides he doesn't want to sell it to you and cancels your order - it's still legal, as the sale hasn't happened yet. He may even have taken your money, but if said product hasn't left his door, he's under no obligation to complete the sale (of course, he will have to give you a refund or it becomes fraud).
Like the recent Dell case - Dell didn't ship anyone their goods, so they had the power to cancel all their orders (the case was about what remedies could be had in the case - forced arbitration). The older Amazon case, where officially Amazon undercharged people and shipped them product, is something where the consumer's in the right, since the sale has occurred, and a seller has no recourse to recoup the losses from consumers who actually received the inadvertently discounted product.
So your eBay seller decided the auction wasn't going to end the way he wanted, and removed the product from sale before the sale was compelte. In the case of the article, though, the seller didn't cancel the auction, and thus the sale was made.
It's also like that state department trying to get rid of surplus, and putting stuff on eBay to sell. It didn't sell well, but they never cancelled their auction, leading them to have to sell the equipment at cut-rate prices (or face legal ramifications).
Models of vehicles that were build during the war years (because they were for the war) are still referred to as being a war model even if they were still in production a year later just due to association. The planes in question were apparently made from 1939 - 1946, which is definitely a war model: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC_Wirraway