logo

Basic Business Law Assignment

   

Added on  2020-03-16

6 Pages1117 Words49 Views
RUNNING HEAD: BASIC BUSINESS LAW 1Basic Business LawSummary of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke ball Company [1893] 1 QB 256Submitted by:

Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Company [1893] 1 QB 256 2ContentsFacts of the case..........................................................................................................................................2Arguments of the plaintiff...........................................................................................................................3Arguments of the defendant........................................................................................................................3Reason for the decision of the case..............................................................................................................4Decision of the court...................................................................................................................................4References...................................................................................................................................................5

Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Company [1893] 1 QB 256 3Facts of the caseCarlil Smoke Ball Co. (Def) had made to pay 100 pounds to the person who contracts flu after using smoke ball. The Carlil Smoke ball Co. Asserted to cure for influenza and the other diseases. The smoke ball was rubbers Carlil (plaintiff) used the Smoke ball but contact flu. The Carbolic Smoke Ball Co produced the 'Carbolic Smoke Ball' that is designed to avert users suffering influenza or related disease. The ad for the product was as follows:Carlil Smoke Ball Co. (Def) will pay a reward of 100 pounds reward to an individual who contracts the growing epidemic influenza, colds, or any disease from cold, subsequent to using the ball three times daily for two weeks as per the directions given with each ball. Further the advert stated that a sum of 1,000 pounds is deposited with the Alliance Bank, Regent Street, in regard of performance in the matter(McKendrick, 2014). Mrs Louisa Elizabeth Carlill purchased the balls and used it as per the mentioned direction, three times a day, from November 20, 1891, to January 17, 1892, while she contracted

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Carlill v Carbolic Smokeball Company [1893] 1 QB 256
|7
|1296
|120

Case Summary: Carlill vs Carbolic Smokeball Company
|2
|561
|20

(Sample) Business Law: Assignment
|7
|1317
|55

Carbolic Ball Company Case Study
|7
|1159
|84

The Carbolic Smoke Ball Case: Facts, Arguments, and Conclusion
|9
|616
|462

How to Brief a Case - Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company
|6
|733
|209