Why will you seldom need to refer to the Carbolic Smoke Ball case? (UK legal)
I am attempting to answer this question. However I am finding myself stumped. Because this case (Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co)  is an authority on the reward type of advertisement, where a unilateral offer may be created, I’m finding it hard to explain why you wouldn’t cite this case often!
If anyone could help me out, it would be greatly appreciated!
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.