Menu
Home
People
Places
Arts
History
Plants & Animals
Science
Life & Culture
Technology
Reference.org
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co
open-in-new
<p><i>Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company</i> <a href="http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1892/1.html">[1893] 1 QB 256</a> is an <a href="/facts/English_contract_law/FC6LLoDT">English contract law</a> decision by the <a href="/facts/English_Court_of_Appeal/0uWNLJI9">Court of Appeal</a>, which held an advertisement containing certain terms to get a reward constituted a binding <a href="/facts/Unilateral_contract/SkqyGj6S">unilateral</a> offer that could be accepted by anyone who performed its terms. It is notable for its treatment of <a href="/facts/Contract/SkqyGj6S">contract</a> and of <a href="/facts/Puffery/bNjwzypQ">puffery</a> in advertising, for its curious subject matter associated with medical <a href="/facts/Quackery/CA5N20JR">quackery</a>, and how the influential judges (particularly <a href="/facts/Nathaniel_Lindley,_Baron_Lindley/xhzkEIVB">Lindley</a> and <a href="/facts/Charles_Bowen,_Baron_Bowen/NzCCsbJq">Bowen</a>) developed the law in inventive ways. <i>Carlill</i> is frequently discussed as an introductory contract case, often one of the first cases a law student studies in the law of contract. </p><p>The case concerned a <a href="/facts/Influenza/nWuFzh6L">flu</a> remedy called the "carbolic smoke ball". The manufacturer advertised that buyers who found it did not work would be awarded £100, a considerable amount of money at the time. The company was found to have been bound by its advertisement, which was construed as an <a href="/facts/Offer_and_acceptance/FaljA6pj">offer</a> which the buyer, by using the smoke ball, accepted, creating a contract. The Court of Appeal held the essential elements of a contract were all present, including <a href="/facts/Offer_and_acceptance/FaljA6pj">offer and acceptance</a>, <a href="/facts/Consideration/78wBVflY">consideration</a> and an <a href="/facts/Intention_to_create_legal_relations/oJ42kBHm">intention to create legal relations</a>, and rejected a number of defenses, including <a href="/facts/Puffery/bNjwzypQ">puffery</a>. </p>