Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 36 views

    Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (1893) : April 23, 2015

    Uploaded by

    Kesav
    This document provides a summary of the 1893 English court case Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. It discusses: 1. The facts of the case where Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. advertised a £100 reward if anyone used their product and still contracted influenza, and Mrs. Carlill used it as directed but still got sick and sued. 2. The defenses made by Carbolic Smoke Ball Co., including that the ad was merely promotional and not a serious offer, and that it was not an enforceable contract. 3. The Court of Appeal's judgement that the advertisement constituted a valid contract based on the criteria of offer, acceptance, and consideration, establishing it as an important precedent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (1893) : April 23, 2015

    Uploaded by

    Kesav
    36 views13 pages
    This document provides a summary of the 1893 English court case Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. It discusses: 1. The facts of the case where Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. advertised a £100 reward if anyone used their product and still contracted influenza, and Mrs. Carlill used it as directed but still got sick and sued. 2. The defenses made by Carbolic Smoke Ball Co., including that the ad was merely promotional and not a serious offer, and that it was not an enforceable contract. 3. The Court of Appeal's judgement that the advertisement constituted a valid contract based on the criteria of offer, acceptance, and consideration, establishing it as an important precedent.

    Original Title

    cvc.pptx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document provides a summary of the 1893 English court case Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. It discusses: 1. The facts of the case where Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. advertised a £100 reward if anyone used their product and still contracted influenza, and Mrs. Carlill used it as directed but still got sick and sued. 2. The defenses made by Carbolic Smoke Ball Co., including that the ad was merely promotional and not a serious offer, and that it was not an enforceable contract. 3. The Court of Appeal's judgement that the advertisement constituted a valid contract based on the criteria of offer, acceptance, and consideration, establishing it as an important precedent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    36 views13 pages

    Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (1893) : April 23, 2015

    Uploaded by

    Kesav
    This document provides a summary of the 1893 English court case Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. It discusses: 1. The facts of the case where Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. advertised a £100 reward if anyone used their product and still contracted influenza, and Mrs. Carlill used it as directed but still got sick and sued. 2. The defenses made by Carbolic Smoke Ball Co., including that the ad was merely promotional and not a serious offer, and that it was not an enforceable contract. 3. The Court of Appeal's judgement that the advertisement constituted a valid contract based on the criteria of offer, acceptance, and consideration, establishing it as an important precedent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 13

    Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball

    Co. (1893)
    April 23, 2015
    Plan for today
    1. A task on the essential elements of a valid English contract
    2. Get to know the testing of elements
    3. Get to know the facts of the Carlill case
    4. Come up with defences for the Smoke Ball Co.
    5. Come up with arguments which will trump the defences
    6. Revise the case
    Answers:
    a) offer
    b) consideration
    c) agreement
    d) legal capacity
    e) certainty of terms
    f) acceptance
    g) intention to create legal relations
    What constitues a valid offer?
    1.The offer must be communicated from the offeror to the offeree.
    2.The offer must contain language of commitment.
    3.The offer must be made with serious intention by the offeror.
    4.The offer must be reasonably definite, usually containing the names
    of the parties involved, the subject-matter, the consideration and
    the time and place for performance.
    What consitutes valid acceptance?
    1. The acceptance must be made to the offeror and not to anyone
    else unless the offeror has authorised it.
    2. The acceptance must be communicated.
    3. The acceptance must be actually heard or received in writing to be
    effective.
    4. If the offer specifies the method of acceptance you must accept it
    using a method that is no less effective than the method specified.
    5. A request for more information is not the same as a counter-offer
    and will not have the effect of rejecting the original offer.
    Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (1893)
    - Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (D) manufactured and sold The Carbolic
    Smoke Ball
    - the company placed ads in various newspapers offering a reward of
    100 pounds to any person who used the smoke ball three times per
    day as directed and contracted influenza, colds, or any other disease
    - after seeing the ad Carlill (P) purchased a ball and used it as directed
    - Carlill contracted influenza and made a claim for the reward 
    - Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. refused to pay and Carlill sued for damages
    arising from breach of contract
    Judgement
    • judgment for 100 pounds was entered for Carlill
    Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. appealed
    The defences
    1. The advertisement was „a mere puff” – a sales gimmick with no
    intention
    2. A contract with the whole world is no contract at all
    3. The wording was too vague
    4. Acceptance was not communicated
    5. Mrs Carlill provided no consideration for CSC’s promise to pay the
    reward
    Court of Appeal (LJs Lindley, Bowen and
    Smith)
    1. The language of the ad indicating that the CSC had £1,000 in the
    bank directly contradicts the claim of ”puffery”
    2. It was not a contract with the whole world but with those who
    fulfill the stipulated conditions
    3. The terms were not vague if read in their plain meaning; entitled to
    reward (that is, a contract is formed) if one used the ball for two
    weeks, three times a day and got the flu
    4. Performance of the condition of the ad was sufficient acceptance
    and it was not necessary that CSC be notified of the intention to be
    bound
    - notification of acceptance need not precede performance, in this case
    acceptance was contemporaneous with performance
    5. The inconvenience of Carlill was sufficient consideration
    Significance
    • it provides an excellent study of the basic principles of contract and
    how they relate to every day life
    • by running almost every possible defence, the defense forced the
    court to address all of them
    • it still binds the lower courts of England and Wales and is cited by
    judges with approval
    Tha faith of Mrs. Carlill and the CSC?
    • a new company was formed and the owner placed new ads:

    "Many thousand Carbolic Smoke Balls were sold on these


    advertisements, but only three people claimed the reward of £100, thus
    proving conclusively that this invaluable remedy will prevent and cure
    the above mentioned diseases. The CARBOLIC SMOKE BALL COMPANY
    LTD. now offer £200 REWARD to the person who purchases a Carbolic
    Smoke Ball and afterwards contracts any of the following diseases...„
    • Mr Roe died in 1899 of tuberculosis aged 57
    • Mrs Carlill died in 1942 aged 92 of old age

    You might also like