1. Law
  2. Contract
  3. considerandnbspcarlill v carbolic smoke ball coandnbsp1893 1 qb 256andnbspa what...

Question: considerandnbspcarlill v carbolic smoke ball coandnbsp1893 1 qb 256andnbspa what...

Question details

Consider Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256:

 

a. What is the ratio decidendi of the case?

 

b. Is the contract a unilateral or bilateral contract? Why?

 

c. Could Mrs Carlill have successfully sued the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company for breach of contract if she had been given the smoke ball by a friend rather than purchasing it herself?

 

d. This case may be viewed as an early attempt by the courts to regulate misleading and deceptive advertising. Does the law of contract provide a satisfactory vehicle to control such conduct? What are some of its shortcomings? Why was the law of contract used in this case to control misleading advertising instead of the law of torts or statute law?

 

Solution by an expert tutor
Blurred Solution
This question has been solved
Subscribe to see this solution