Contract Issue Essay

545 Words3 Pages
The Karen case on an ad of Slim Sally looks similar to the Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball in 1893 where the ad offered some amount of money if the product did not work or affect the consumer as promised. Refer to the Carbolic smoke ball case, Carlill as the consumer has won the case decided by the court where the court judged that the company has done a binding contract with the consumer. At the beginning, the company of the Carbolic Smoke Ball refused to pay Mrs Carlill because they say the ad offer was just a ‘puff’. There were also some arguments given by the company in the court. First, they say that it was no intention that brings to the legally binding agreement. But the court held that there was legal intention because it was a commercial transaction and intention was presumed. Another argue by the company said that the ad was just an invitation to treat (not a contract). But the court held that a newspaper advertisement was generally offers to treat, which in other word could be said specifically as an offer. Then, the company also argue that Mrs. Carlill did not make an acceptance or agreement to the offer, as one of a contract element. But the court concluded that she did accept the offer by buying and using the product as directed. Lastly, the company argued there was no communication between them to do an acceptance or agreement. But then, once again, the court did not agree with them and said that it was a unilateral contract and the communication of acceptance did not have to be made. Therefore, to the case of Karen with the Slim Sally’s ad, it can be concluded as a unilateral contract, not an invitation to treat. There are many similar points with the above case of Carbolic Smoke Ball’s ad. The Slim Sally product is similarly also offering a reward to the consumers if their product does not work as promised which is a free trip to Hawaii.

More about Contract Issue Essay

Open Document