Why will you seldom need to refer to the Carbolic Smoke Ball case? (UK legal)

I don’t know anything about it, but were there any cases after that one or law changes after that that made it so that that particular case is no longer valid?

The case remains relevant today however there has been a number of laws passed since that provide additional statutory remedies to false or misleading advertising.

Thanks, I will look into those cases further.

I think that @Lightlyseared is right. You won’t refer to it because the defenses available to such type of advertising have increased because of additional statutory penalties. The case is still relevant because it covers pretty much all the basics of contract law as it stands today, and therefore is a great teaching tool and all the law and defenses available at that time are still relevant today…it’s just outdated because of the newly available defenses.

I suspect that advertising agencies are also aware of the laws and would advise accordingly if a client suggested including some type of guarantee.