Home > Case Studies > Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball: A Case Study

Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball: A Case Study

By: Lorna Elliott LLB (hons), Barrister - Updated: 25 Oct 2012 |
 
Carlill Carbolic Smoke Ball Contract

The case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball is one of the most important cases in English legal history. In essence it defined what it is to create an ‘offer’ in an advertisement, and how a member of the public successfully argued that they had ‘accepted’ the offer and performed under the terms of the advertisement (contract.)

Facts of the Case

The Carbolic Smoke Ball Company advertised in the Pall Mall Gazette in 1891 that their Carbolic Smoke Ball was a cure for flu, bronchitis, coughs, colds, headaches, hay-fever, whooping cough, laryngitis and sore throats amongst others.

It was so confident of the usefulness of the carbolic smoke ball, and its ability not only to cure but also to prevent someone from getting the ‘flu, that it advertised on the following basis: Anyone who used the carbolic smoke ball in a particular way for a specified period of time, but who still caught influenza afterwards, would be entitled to claim £100 from the company.

The advertisement went on to say that the company had gone so far as to deposit £1000 in the Alliance Bank in the event of any such claims. The plaintiff (who nowadays would be called the ‘claimant’) saw the advertisement and decided to buy one of the carbolic smoke balls. She used it exactly as advised, but still caught influenza. She took the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company to court in order to claim her £100. The court found in her favour, but the defendants appealed.

The Defendant’s Case

On appeal, the defendant’s case was that there was no binding contract between the parties. The defendant company had no means of checking the ball, or of establishing whether the plaintiff had in fact used the ball as directed. They also said that the plaintiff had not provided any consideration, and that merely doing an act in private (i.e. following instructions) would not be enough.

They argued, in the alternative, that if the court found there to be a contract, that contract was no more than a ‘wagering contract’ in which liability was purely determined on one issue – whether the plaintiff caught influenza or not - in which case it would be void, or that if it was an insurance policy that it was ‘bad’ because it relied on whether or not there would be an occurrence of an uncertain event. However, the court did not consider that the ‘wager’ or ‘insurance’ arguments were valid.

The Judgment

The plaintiff argued that the advertisement constituted an offer, which could be accepted by anyone who saw it. The court agreed with the plaintiff and dismissed the defendant’s appeal. The advertisement was a promise to pay any person who took up the offer the sum of £100 if they caught the influenza despite having used the smoke ball as directed. The plaintiff provided the consideration required to form part of the contract in their continued use of the carbolic smoke ball.

Usage Today

The effects of this judgment are still felt today. If you lose a family pet and put up a poster offering a reward for its safe return, you are providing an ‘offer’ which someone may accept, if they find your pet safe and well. Similarly, the police offer rewards to ‘anyone’ who can provide information leading to the arrest and/or conviction of a suspect in a criminal investigation. If a member of the public provides that information, and the police are as a result able to arrest/secure a conviction against the wanted person, the reward money will become payable.

You might also like...
Share Your Story, Join the Discussion or Seek Advice..
The passage of the court is true.i will do my best to apply it in my business
Albert zakarony - 25-Oct-12 @ 9:16 PM
Share Your Story, Join the Discussion or Seek Advice...
Title:
(never shown)
Firstname:
(never shown)
Surname:
(never shown)
Email:
(never shown)
Nickname:
(shown)
Comment:
Validate:
Enter word:
Topics
Latest Comments
  • Bikerboy700
    Re: The Law & Verbal Agreements
    A company called search point called me to renew a contract for google search adds. They kept calling and harassing me to…
    15 March 2024
  • Haris
    Re: Marriage Contracts
    will you marry me in my contact I m sengle my whatssap numbr +92 03110331553
    11 February 2024
  • Haris
    Re: Marriage Contracts
    I want to see marrie in my contact i am single whatssap number +92 03110331553
    11 February 2024
  • Avinchi
    Re: Marriage Contracts
    IGNORE COMMENTS! ((((ALL INDIANS SEE)))) Property Rights Under the law of marriage contracts a spouse has the right to live in the…
    22 October 2023
  • Judge Judy
    Re: Marriage Contracts
    Regarding the comments please ignore them (SCAM) Just marry me im a judge, 07538577290. Male - 28 Single.
    22 October 2023
  • Deb
    Re: Contracts and Self Employment
    I am self employed and have a contract my contract states my name and the word "employee" in every section. It has headings…
    28 September 2023
  • DEEP DHALI
    Re: Marriage Contracts
    Hi my name is DEEP KUMAR DHALI and I am from India my age was 21 years old any body have from uk women how i marry you please contact me in…
    15 August 2023
  • Yasin
    Re: Marriage Contracts
    I'm Pakistani my age 26 i need a gril in UK with contract marriage but I am very poor people My WhatsApp+923052150964
    13 July 2023
  • Chris
    Re: Broken Employment Contracts
    I am self-employed I run a sole trade business I received an order from a client to perform a service work We signed a written…
    4 April 2023
  • Junayed
    Re: Marriage Contracts
    I am Junayed and am From Bangladesh My WhatsApp 88012918210
    29 March 2023