Carbolic Smoke Ball

Question (11 marks)The case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co Court of Appeal [1893] 1 QB 256; [1892] EWCA Civ 1 was a landmark case from the Nineteenth Century (C19th). A link to information on this case is provided below: https://www.australiancontractlaw.com/cases/carlill.html Refer to this case when answering the four (4) questions below, which are based on the following scenario:It is March 2019. Tasmin who is very health conscious is shopping one day and sees in the local chemist a product called ‘Flu Stop’, manufactured by a company called ‘Sydney Flu Shop’. The advertisement for ‘Flu Stop’ states: “Flu Stop is a healthy alternative to the flu injection without needing to go to the doctor for a needle. We offer a money back guarantee and $5,000 to any person who contracts the flu within a reasonable time, after having used the Flu Stop every day for two months according to the printed directions supplied with each bottle. Proof of receipt of purchase is also required. $5,000 has been deposited at the National Australia Bank, Sydney for this purpose, showing our sincerity in this matter.” Tasmin doesn’t believe in vaccinations and doesn’t want to have a flu injection. The ‘Flu Stop’ costs $70.00. Tasmin buys the product. She follows the instructions for 2 months. In June 2019, after swimming at Icebergs in Bondi, Tasmin succumbs to a cold and then for more information on Carbolic Smoke Ball check on this:https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/carlill-v-carbolic-smoke-ball-co.php