The spelling of the legal case "Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co." is straightforward, with the only challenge being the proper pronunciation of the last name "Carlill." It is pronounced /ˈkɑːlɪl/, with the stress on the first syllable. The case involved a woman named Mrs. Carlill who sued the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company for failing to pay a promised reward for using their product. The case is notable for establishing the principle of unilateral contracts in English law.
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co is a landmark case in English contract law that involved the issue of unilateral contracts. The case was heard in the Court of Appeal in 1893 and played a significant role in shaping the legal concept of acceptance in contract law.
In this case, the Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. advertised a product called the "smoke ball" that was supposed to prevent influenza. The company included a statement in their advertisement stating that they would pay £100 to anyone who used the smoke ball as directed and still contracted influenza. Mrs. Carlill, who used the product as instructed and still fell ill, sued the company for the promised reward.
The Court of Appeal held that there was a valid contract between Mrs. Carlill and the company. They held that the advertisement constituted an offer to the world in general and acceptance of the offer was made by performing the conditions specified in the advertisement. The court reasoned that the depositing of the purchase price and using the smoke ball as directed by Mrs. Carlill amounted to acceptance of the offer. Therefore, Mrs. Carlill was entitled to claim the promised reward.
This case established the principle that acceptance can be by conduct and does not necessarily require the traditional method of communicating acceptance. Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. is widely cited and continues to be an important precedent in contract law, particularly in relation to unilateral contracts.