Suman Siva Prof. Jeong Chun Phuoc 012014111647 Assignment 2 – Weekly Case Law Critique WEEK 1 CASE LAW ON CARLILL V CARBOLIC SMOKE BALL (1893) Issue 1. Was the advertisement by Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. a contract with the whole world? 2. Was the advertisement by Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.‚ rewarding 100 pounds to any person who uses the product (smoke ball) as directed for a given period and still get contracted to influenza‚ colds or other diseases a "mere puff"/ “nudum pactum” ? Analysis From my
Premium Invitation to treat Contract Contract law
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
Premium Invitation to treat Newspaper Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company
Mid – Term Examination Project Fall 2013 - 2014 The issue was between Louisa Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Back at 1892 ‚ There was a big influenza in United Kingdom caused over 1 million people get killed . Carbolic Smoke Ball Company made a cure which was a steam ball that u inhale 3 times in a day after two weeks time you can not get any influenza . Company made an advertisenment via newspaper named Pall Mall Gazette
Premium Influenza Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company Invitation to treat
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball [1892] 2 QB 484 The case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball is one of the most important cases in English legal history. 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
Premium Invitation to treat Advertising Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company
CASE ANALYSIS: Case: Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1893] 1 QB 256 Introduction: Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company Ltd is one of the most leading cases in the law of contracts under common law. Known for both its academic importance and its contribution in the development of the laws relating unilateral contracts‚ it is still binding on lower courts in England and Wales‚ and is still cited by judges in their judgements. This research paper aims to critically examine and analyze the
Premium Contract Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company Invitation to treat
case of Carlil v. Carbolic Smoke Ball 1893‚ Mrs Carlil saw an advertisement of Carbolic Smoke Ball Company will rewards 100 pounds to anyone who caught flu after using its smoke balls as directed for 14 days. Later then‚ Mrs Carlil bought the smoke ball‚ used it directed and caught flu. However‚ when she wanted to claimed that 100 pounds‚ she was rejected by the company. So she sued the company in contract. The case was concluded where the advertisement made by Carbolic Smoke Ball Company is an offer
Premium Invitation to treat Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company Contract
Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Ltd published an advertisement in Pall Mall Gazzette offering that they would pay a sum of 100 pound to anyone who got contracted with influenza after using its product following the instructions provided with the smoke ball and they had deposited 1000 pound in the Alliance Bank to prove their seriousness over the advertisement. The plaintiff used their product but still contracted influenza. The plaintiff sued the company for 100 pound. But yet‚ Carbolic Smoke Ball Co
Premium Contract Invitation to treat Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company
Assignment on the case of Carlill vs. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Ltd a) Explain whether there was any contract made between Carlill and Carbolic Smoke Ball or not? Give reason. Yes‚ there was contract made between Carlill and Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Ltd. The advertisement was placed in newspaper and said that the smoke ball product would prevent influenza if the buyers used it as directed and in spite of this if the buyer catches influenza than the company would give £100 to the user
Premium Invitation to treat Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company
case summary of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1892] 2 QB 484 Prepared by Claire Macken Facts: • Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (def) promises in ad to pay 100 pounds to any person who contracts flu after using smoke ball. • Carlill (plaintiff) uses ball but contracts flu + relies on ad. Issue: Was there a binding contract between the parties? - A contract requires notification of acceptance - Did Mrs Carlill notify Carbolic of the acceptance of the offer? - Did Mrs Carlill provide consideration
Premium Contract Invitation to treat Contract law
Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. [1893] Q.B. 256 (C.A.) Facts The Defendants were a medical company named “Carbolic Smoke Ball”. Who manufactured and sold a product called the "smoke ball"‚ a cure for influenza and a number of other diseases. The company published advertisements in the Pall Mall Gazette and other newspapers on November 13‚ 1891‚ claiming that it would pay £100 to anyone who got sick with influenza after using its product three times a day for two weeks‚ according to the
Premium Contract Invitation to treat