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:
Latest Comments
  • Emgem
    Re: How a Landlord Agreement Works
    Would this be classed as a breach of tenancy agreement on the landlords part. In the agreement it says pets are not allowed in…
    30 March 2020
  • stone
    Re: Breach of Contract
    I employed a maid to clean and take care of my house to be paid at the end of the month;she worked for two weeks and abandoned the job and…
    17 March 2020
  • Itsme
    Re: Child Maintenance Contracts
    My ex is trying to say that if he is going to see his son then I have to do one drop or pay for one of his lifts? And I have to pay…
    14 March 2020
  • Elaine Yates
    Re: Store Agreements Explained
    Can you pay some money off a Promissory note and then borrow again against the original note For example sign a promissory note for…
    11 March 2020
  • Salpal29
    Re: What If I Don't Have a Written Contract With My Employer?
    My partner now, has a self employed oral agreement with his employer. He has worked there…
    2 February 2020
  • Rose
    Re: The Law & Verbal Agreements
    My daughter and husband bought a house with a small building plot within the boundary that was retained by the seller to build…
    28 January 2020
  • Art
    Re: Legally Binding Contracts
    I took admission for one of the beauty course in private beauty salon in London and paid half fees at the beaning and after a month…
    28 January 2020
  • Ghibli
    Re: How a Landlord Agreement Works
    Landlord changing locks and not supplying a key or emergency or temporary accomadation. This after a fire and after the fire…
    26 January 2020
  • alfie
    Re: Title Deeds: Who Keeps Them?
    no point posting questions here nobody answers!
    24 January 2020
  • Husein
    Re: Contracts and Self Employment
    I am a self employed and working in Amazon last 6 month as delivery driver through RAM distribution Company.Unexpected called me…
    10 January 2020