Re:The time Pepsi got sued for a $33M fighter jet
by kolinko on Sunday August 15, 2021 @01:32PM
(#28190575)
Fun fact ad 3 - in some countries (Poland) there is a concept in law of a public promise. If a corporation publicly promises something (a competition usually), they are obliged to act upon it, even if there were no signatures on the other side.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The time Pepsi got sued for a $33M fighter jet
by jimnotgym on Sunday August 15, 2021 @06:58PM
(#28193338)
In England and Wales (Scotland has its own legal system) there is very famous case law that says that an offer can be made to the world at large (through an advert in this case).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlill_v_Carbolic_Smoke_Bal...
Which may seem to apply, but this was an offer to add a guarantee to the terms. Whereas merely advertising a price is just an invitation for the buyer to make you an offer. Here is an almost as famous case.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_Society_of_GB...
I am not surprised our fellow common law jurisdictions like the US reached the same conclusion.
The case law that makes up English civil law, especially the early stuff is really fascinating stuff to me. IANAL but understanding the contact law from these cases has won me several disputes in my professional life.
Re:The time Pepsi got sued for a $33M fighter jet
by garaetjjte on Sunday August 15, 2021 @03:50PM
(#28191914)
"Above advertisement does not constitute offer as meant by the article 66 of Civil Code" :)
Re:The time Pepsi got sued for a $33M fighter jet
by pythonaut_16 on Sunday August 15, 2021 @04:53PM
(#28192443)
The legal form of "but I had my fingers crossed so it doesn't count"