Introduction:

This case is based on Specific and General offer, in this case it is settled that two manifestation of a willingness to make the same bargain do not constitute a contract unless one is made with reference to other.

Facts:

In Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. the defendants i.e., the carbolic small ball company advertised their product "Carbolic Smoke Ball, containing certain terms to get a reward constituted a binding unilateral offer that could be accepted by anyone who performed its terms. It is notable for its curious subject matter and how the influential a preventive remedy against influenza. In the advertisement they offered to pay a sum of £ 100 as reward to anyone who contacted influenza, cold or any disease caused by taking cold, after having used the Smoke Ball three times a day for two weeks, in accordance with the printed directions. They also announced that a sum of £ 100 had been deposited with the Alliance Bank to show their sincerity in the matter. The plaintiff (Mrs. Carlill) relying on the advertisement purchased a Smoke Ball from a chemist, used the same in accordance with the directions of the given in the advertisement but still caught influenza. She sued the carbolic smoke ball company  to claim the reward of £ 100 advertised by them on term that if someone caught influenza even after taking the medication as prescribed by them . It was held that this being a general offer addressed to all the world had ripened into a contract with the plaintiff by her act of performance of the required conditions and thus accepting the offer. She was, therefore, entitled to claim the reward.

Judgement:

"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 anyone who, before, it is retracted, performs the conditions, 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. It has been noted above that performance of the conditions of the offer amounts to the acceptance of the offer. It may be further noted here that unless the person performing those conditions has got the knowledge of the offer, there is no question of his act amounting to acceptance. On the other hand, if the plaintiff knows that the defendant has announced a reward of Rs. 500 to be paid to anyone who finds the defendant's son, the plaintiff can claim this amount when he is successful in finding the defendant's son. Similarly, if the plaintiff knows that a reward has been announced to be given to anybody giving information leading to the conviction of an assailant for murder, she would be entitled to the reward on supplying the necessary information.