Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company

• The Carbolic Smoke Ball Company published a newspaper advertisement offering £100 to anyone who caught influenza after using their smoke ball three times daily for two weeks as directed
• The company deposited £1,000 in the Alliance Bank to show their sincerity
• Mrs. Carlill purchased and used the smoke ball as directed for the stated period
• She contracted influenza and claimed the £100 reward
• The company refused payment, arguing: (1) the ad was mere puff, (2) offer cannot be made to the world, (3) no acceptance was communicated, (4) no consideration from Mrs. Carlill

1. Whether an advertisement can constitute a valid offer capable of acceptance?
2. Whether an offer can be made to the world at large?
3. Whether acceptance of a unilateral offer requires communication, or is performance sufficient?
4. Whether Mrs. Carlill provided valid consideration?

• The advertisement was not mere puff; the deposit of £1,000 demonstrated serious intention (Bowen LJ)
• An offer can be made to the world at large; it is addressed to anyone who performs the conditions (Lindley LJ)
• In unilateral contracts, acceptance is by performance of the stipulated conditions; no prior communication of acceptance is required (Bowen LJ)
• Consideration existed in the inconvenience sustained by Mrs. Carlill in using the product as directed, and in the benefit to the company from increased sales (Bowen LJ)
• Mrs. Carlill was entitled to the £100

An advertisement containing definite terms of a reward, coupled with evidence of sincerity (such as depositing money in a bank), constitutes a valid unilateral offer to the world at large. Such an offer is accepted by any person who performs the conditions stated in the offer; no separate communication of acceptance is necessary. The inconvenience of performing the stated conditions constitutes valid consideration.