Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co product called the "smoke ball" and claimed it to be a cure for influenza and a number of other diseases. (The 1889–1890 flu pandemic was estimated to have killed 1 million people.) The smoke ball was a rubber ball with a tube attached. It was filled with carbolic acid (or phenol). The tube would be inserted into a user's nose and squeezed at the bottom to release the vapours. The nose would run, ostensibly flushing out viral infections. The Company published advertisements in the "Pall Mall Gazette" and other newspapers on November 13, 1891, claiming that it would pay £100
Litigation before the judgment in Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co smokeball in the advert. That a contract should be completed by a private act is against the language of Lord Blackburn in "Brogden v. Metropolitan Ry. Co.". The use of the ball at home stands on the same level as the writing a letter which is kept in the writer's drawer. There was no service done for the company. On the issue of time limits, the fact that it is difficult to decide should show, submitted Finlay QC, that the fair result is no contract at all. Litigation before the judgment in Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co The Litigation