Page 55 - PRINCIPLE OF LAW- FINAL (eISBN) pdf

Politeknik Kota Bharu

Famous case: Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB
256 Court of Appeal

• A Newspaper advert placed by the defendant stated:-

“£100 reward will be paid by the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company

to any person who contracts the influenza after having used

the ball three times daily for two weeks according to the

printed directions supplied with each ball £1000 is deposited

with the Alliance Bank, shewing our sincerity in the matter.

• Mrs. Carlill purchased some smoke balls and used them

according to the directions and caught flu. She sought to

claim the stated £100 reward.

• The defendant raised the following arguments to
demonstrate the advertisement was a mere invitation to

treat rather than an offer:

a. The advert was a sales puff and lacked intent to be an

offer.

b. It is not possible to make an offer to the world.

c. There was no notification of acceptance.

d. The wording was too vague to constitute an offer since

there was no stated time limit as to catching the flu.

e. There was no consideration provided since the 'offer'

did not specify that the user of the balls must have

purchased them.

43