Boots+Cash+Chemist

=Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots=

**Facts**
Boots operated as a regular pharmacy, with items on shelves and pharmaceuticals requiring a pharmacist to supervise the sale. The Pharmaceutical Society alleged that Boots infringed the //Pharmacy and Poisons Act// 1933 requiring the sale of certain drugs to be supervised by a registered pharmacist. The claim failed at first instance and the Society appealed.

**Held (Somervell LJ)**
The Society had argued that a drug sale was completed when the customer took an item from the shelf and put it in their cart/basket. The result of such analysis would be that that when the customer came to the sales desk the pharmacist would not be able to say that the drug could not be sold to that customer. After assessing the legal implications of such an analysis Somervell LJ noted that in relation to //"an ordinary shop, although goods are displayed and it is intended that customers should go and choose what they want, the contract is not completed until, the customer having indicated the articles which he needs, the shopkeeper, or someone on his behalf, accepts that offer. Then the contract is completed.//" The same rule should apply in relation to this case. If the Society’s argument was accepted then customers, once placing an item in their basket, would have no right to substitute a different article which she/he preferred. This would be commercially inconvenient. As a consequence the Society’s case failed because, at the appropriate time, the sale was supervised as required by legislation.