top of page
Vignesh AL

Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256

FACTS

The Carbolic Smoke Ball Company, the defendant, advertised their products in a newspaper, promising a £100 reward to anyone who bought and used the product but still got influenza even after carefully following the directions. The advertisement went on to say that the company had proven its honesty by £1000 in a bank account to act as the reward. The Plaintiff, Lilli Carlill, purchased a smoke ball and utilised it as directed.  Plaintiff contracted the flu a few weeks after starting to use the smoke ball.


ISSUES

Whether the advertisement in question constituted an offer or an invitation to offer?


JUDGMENT

The Court acknowledged that vague advertisements usually don't create enforceable promises. However, in this case, the Defendant's £1000 deposit showed sincerity, making their reward offer a legally binding promise. The modern legal view allows offers to be made to the public, but a contract forms only when someone fulfils the specified conditions. The plaintiff, by using the product as directed, accepted the Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.'s offer, resulting in a concluded contract and entitlement to the claimed amount. The plaintiff was held entitled to the claimed amount.

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page