The alternate facts: Mr. Partridge placed an advertisement in Cage & Aviary Birds magazine containing the words Bramble finches, 25 each. The RSPCA brought an action for offering for sale a protected species in contravention of the Amended Protection of Birds Act 1953. The justices found Partridge liable. He appealed to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision, which was then reviewed by the House of Lords.

The alternate decision: the holding of liability was reversed. The defendant cannot be held liable for offering for sale a bramblefinch as the advertisement constituted an invitation to treat. Partridge was therefore not making an offer.

Consider the following procedural law questions:

[1] Is this a criminal or civil law case?