Case Brif on Carlill and Carbolic Smoke Ball Company

Case Brief on Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company

1) Title: Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1893] 1 Q.B 256 Court Of Appeal

2) Statement of Facts: The proprietors of The Carbolic Smoke Ball Company, the defendants, issued an advertisement in various newspaper stating that anyone who used their product and still contracted influenza, colds or any other disease was entitled to 100 pounds. After seeing the ad, Carlill (the plaintiff) purchased the ball and used it as directed but still contracted influenza and made claim for the reward.

3) Procedural History: It is in the court of first instance, the High Court.

4) Issues: 1.Was the ad a “mere puff”?

2. Does performance of the conditions advertised in the newspaper constitute acceptance of an offer?

3. Whether there was consideration?

5) Judgement: Lindley, L.J.

6) Holding: Mrs Carlill was entitled to the reward. There was a unilateral contract comprising of the offer (by advertisement of the Smoke Ball Company) and acceptance (by performance of the conditions stated in the offer by Mrs. Carlill).

7) Rule of Law: 1.It was not a “mere puff”. This conclusion was based on the statement referring to the deposit of 1000 pounds. This demonstrated intent to enter into legal relations.

2. In unilateral contracts there is no requirement that the offeree communicates an intention to accept, since acceptance is through full performance.

3. There were two considerations. One is the consideration of the inconvenience of having to use this ball for two weeks three times a day and the other is the money to be gained by the defendants in the enhanced sale of the ball since the plaintiff had to use them.

8) Reasoning: It is quite possible to make an offer with the world as long as intention to make offer is there. This ad is an offer to pay 100 pounds to anyone who will perform these conditions, and the performance of these conditions is the acceptance of the offer. As a general rule, to make a binding...