Carlill and Carbolic

1219 Words5 Pages
THE CASE OF CARLILL V. CARBOLIC SMOKE BALL COMPANY (1892) 2 QB 484 COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION) JUSTICE HAWKINS (CIVIL DIVISION) CURT OF APPEAL JUDGES : LORD JUSTICE LINDLEY LORD JUSTICE BOWEN LORD JUSTICE A.L. SMITH LOUISAi CARLILL – THE DEFENDANT CARBOLIC SMOKE BALL COMPANY – THE PLAINTIFF The carbolic smoke ball company produced and sold smoke balls.The company placed an advert on the Pall Mall Gazette as well as other newspapers. The advert which was placed stated that: “£100 reward will be paid by the carbolic smoke ball company to anyone who conracts the influenza after having used the ball three times daily for two weeks according to the printed directions supplied with each ball”. The company also went further stating that “£1000 has been deposited in the alliance bank , shewing her sincerity in the matter. Mrs Carlill bought this smoke ball and used it as described by the defendant.She used the smoke ball for two weeks and went on using it till she got the epidemic. She requested for her reward but she was denied of it. The plaintiff then sued the company at the queen’s bench. The case was decided in her favour, that the plaintiff be paid £100 as promised.The company then appealed to a higher court. ISSUES PRESENTED * Is it a binding contract * Is there need for a notification of acceptance in the contract * There is no consideration * It is a contract too vague to be enforced * It si an offer the terms of which are too vague to be treated as a definite offer * Was the statement that £100 be paid a mere puff Lord Justice Lindley states that the first point is common to the words of this advertisement and to the words of all other advertisement offering rewards. That is nt made to anybody in particular. He also said they are offers to anybody who performs these conditions named in
Open Document