In October last year, Nicholas Buttle purchased a 2.16-carat diamond ring on the website of Sydney-based Royal Diamonds for the advertised price of $1,123.
After receiving a receipt for his future fiancée’s engagement ring confirming the order, later the same day he received a message from Royal Diamonds that said, “Unfortunately the diamond which you have selected is no longer available. Was there another stone you had in mind?”
Buttle responded that he wanted a replacement of a similar or higher grade, citing the business’s own terms and conditions, which appeared on the original order and payment confirmation: “in the event that a diamond is unavailable, a diamond of similar or higher grade may be offered, or a refund of the purchase price”.
Royal Diamonds staff told Buttle the price of the ring was incorrect due to a “typing error” and advised that the terms would not apply in this instance and offered a refund.
The case was later brought before the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal which found “an absolute contract of sale made between the parties” and ruled Royal Diamonds must provide an alternative ring valued at $34,429 or higher.
The Tribunal dismissed an appeal made by Royal Diamonds last month and the business was ordered to pay all legal costs, including Buttle’s fees for hiring legal representation.
A director of Royal Diamonds, who did not want to be named, was quoted in The Daily Telegraph as saying the business would be forced to close.
"We are going to make the ring and close the company," he told the newspaper.
The director also reportedly said the case would set a precedent and most members of the public would be aware a two-carat diamond would be valued at more than $1,100.
Jeweller attempted to contact Royal Diamonds for comment but there had been no response at the time of publication.
More reading
Royal Diamonds appeal decision