Facts

The defendant, the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company, placed an advertisement in a newspaper for their products, stating that any person who purchased and used their product but still contracted influenza despite properly following the instructions would be entitled to a 100 reward. The advert further stated that the company had demonstrated its sincerity by placing 1000 in a bank account to act as the reward. The claimant, Mrs Carlill, thus purchased some smoke balls and, despite proper use, contracted influenza and attempted to claim the 100 reward from the defendants. The defendants contended that they could not be bound by the advert as it was an invitation to treat rather than an offer on the grounds that the advert was: mere 'puff' and lacking true intent; that an offer could not be made 'to the world'; the claimant had not technically provided acceptance; the wording of the advert was insufficiently precise; and, that there was no consideration, as necessary for the creation of a binding contract in law.

STUDENTS ARE REQUIRED TO COMMENT ON THE CASE OF CARLILL V CARBOLIC SMOKE BALL CO. LTD (1893) 1 QB 256