pre-negotiation process, invitations Choose... to treat have no legal effect. Royal Bank of Canada v. Gill Hercules Management v. Ernst & Young Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company In this case, the concept of Breach Rylands v. Fletcher of Contract is clarified as the courts Anns v. Merton, London Borough Council determined that the breach was Selkirk Petroleum Products Ltd. v. Husky Oil Ltd. substantial enough to constitute R. v. Spratt discharge because the failure to More v. Bauer Nike Hockey Inc. AMJ Campbell v. Kord Products Inc. perform was significant. Baid v. Aliments Rinag Foods Inc. Yin v. Liu Chopra v. Eaton (T.) Co. This is a product liability case that Hadley v. Baxendale enforces the legal principle that Haig v. Bamford injury, no matter how substantial, Donoghue v. Stevenson does not guarantee that others will Choose... be held liable as negligence must still be proven