Principles Of Law In Carlill V. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company

The legal issue in this question is whether there is any binding contract between Julie and Leila and whether Julie can bring an action against Leila for refusing to honour the $50 reward stated in the advertisement that she had placed in the local newspaper. This happened after Julie who had read the advertisement, found and returned the advertised locket and chain to Leila’s house to claim the $50 reward.

The relevant principle of law relating to this issue is that the advertisement of reward is an offer made to the entire world. Through clearly stating the reward and the required conditions to be fulfilled for the reward in an advertisement, the person who placed the advertisement is now the offeror. This is an offer made to the entire world that can be accepted by anyone with the knowledge of the advertisement, through performing the stated conditions. By fulfilling the required conditions, the person becomes an offeree and is therefore eligible to claim the reward.

The above principle of law regarding an offer made to the entire world is established in Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893) 1 QB 256. In this case, the newspaper advert by the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company stated the reward of £100 for anyone who contracted flu after using the product as instructed. On top of it the
The offer Leila had made is a unilateral offer made to the entire world and can be accepted by anyone who fulfills the stated conditions of finding and returning the locket and chain. In this situation, Julie by finding and returning the locket and chain after seeing the advertisement became the offeree and should therefore be entitled to claim the stated reward of