Contract Law: Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Case Study

This assignment analyzes the landmark case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Ltd [1892] 2 QB 484, focusing on its significance within the context of Australian contract law. The analysis covers the case's relevance to key contract law concepts, including legally binding agreements, the nature of offer and acceptance, and the role of consideration. It explores how the case has shaped the understanding of unilateral contracts and the intention to create legal relations. The assignment also examines potential alternative remedies available to Mrs. Carlill in the modern legal landscape, referencing the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) and related precedents. Furthermore, it assesses the lasting impact of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball in Australian courts and provides a critical evaluation of the case, supported by relevant case law such as Smith v Hughes (1870) LR 6 QB 597. The analysis highlights the foundational principles established by the case and their continuing relevance in contemporary contract law practice.

Running head: CONTRACT LAW
CONTRACT LAW
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1CONTRACT LAW
 How is the case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Ltd [1892] 2 QB 484 relevant to the
important concepts of Contract Law in Australia in a legally binding agreement?
The case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1892] EWCA Civ 1 is a case in
relation to contract law of the United Kingdom. The case is approximately hundred years old and
the decision was provided by the Court of Appeal. This case is considered to have laid the
foundations for contract and is the preliminary case regarding contract.
 Is there any other alternate remedy or relief that could be provided to Carlill in the
Twenty First Century? If so, explain in detail and support your answer with relevant
precedents.
In the present times, Mrs. Carlill could approach the remedy as provided in section 18 of
the Australian Consumer law [ACL]. This section provides that any business house or
organization should not engage itself in any misrepresentation or any deceiving conduct.
Additional information must always be provided in order to avoid any situation of misleading or
dishonest conduct.
 What is the significance of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Ltd [1892] 2 QB 484 in
Australian courts?
This is the most repeatedly cited case in relation to contract of the common law. It
specifies regarding the unilateral contract. It delivers an exceptional analysis of the elementary
principles of a particular contract and how the principles can be related to the routine and daily
life. This case provided the essentials of a contract or agreement, that is, the factors of intention,
consideration, offer and the acceptance of the offer.

2CONTRACT LAW
 Explain the nature of offer, acceptance and consideration in a contract in the light of
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Ltd [1892] 2 QB 484?
The characteristic of offer in relation to the given case is that the offer can be made to the
general populace at large. In case of an acceptance it can be said that the acceptance can be made
even without communication. The intention of the parties are always present in case of
commercial contracts. Regarding consideration it can be said that the any act may be considered
as a value or consideration.
 Analyse Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. Ltd [1892] 2 QB 484 critically and provide
your views.
In this case, the company was liable to pay to Mrs. Carlill. Smith v Hughes (1870) LR 6
QB 597 is another relevant case law in this regard.

3CONTRACT LAW
References
Australian Consumer law
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1892] EWCA Civ 1
Smith v Hughes (1870) LR 6 QB 597