Lindley, Bowen, Smith A.L.

Biographical details

Lindley, Bowen, Smith A.L. Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company (1892)

It is an offer made to all the world;and why should not an offer be made to all the world which is to ripen into a contract with anybody who comes forward and performs the condition? It is an offer to become liable to any one who,before it is retracted, performs the condition, and, although the offer is made to the world, the contract is made with that limited portion of the public who come forward and perform the condition on the faith of the advertisement.
Source: Wikisource

Lindley, Bowen, Smith A.L. Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company (1892)

But there is this clear gloss to be made upon that doctrine, that as notification of acceptance is required for the benefit of the person who makes the offer, the person who makes the offer may dispense with notice to himself if he thinks it desirable to do so, and I suppose there can be no doubt that where a person in an offer made by him to another person, expressly or impliedly intimates a particular mode of acceptance as sufficient to make the bargain binding, it is only necessary for the other person to whom such offer is made to follow the indicated method of acceptance
Source: Wikisource

Lindley, Bowen, Smith A.L. Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company (1892)

In my judgment, the advertisement was an offer intended to be acted upon, and when accepted and the conditions performed constituted a binding promise on which an action would lie, assuming there was consideration for that promise. The defendants have contended that it was a promise in honour or an agreement or a contract in honour - whatever that may mean. I understand that if there is no consideration for a promise, it may be a promise in honour, or,as we should call it, a promise without consideration and nudum pactum
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature