After inheriting a large sum of money Larry decided to indulge his passion for
swimming and entered into a contract with Swimming Pools R US to construct an outdoor swimming pool in the garden of his house.

The pool was to be 50 feet long by 15 feet wide by 6 feet deep, and was to be
cleaned by a special non-chlorine based filter system. The pool was due to be finished in March and Larry entered into another contract with Colin to landscape his garden starting on 1 May.

Pools R US finished the pool on 15 March. However, when Larry came to try it for the first time he found that it was only 5 feet deep. In addition, Pools R US had not installed the non-chlorine filter system but had instead used an ordinary chlorine based system. As a result, Larry, who unknown to Pools R US was highly allergic to chlorine, suffered a severe reaction and had to take a week off his work and as a result lost a potentially lucrative contract.

On 1 April, Colin informed Larry that he was too busy to do his garden and that
he would have to get someone else to do it. The only person available, however, will charge Larry $1000 more than Colin agreed for doing the work.

Discussion:

Analyze the scenario from the perspective of the law of contract, advising Larry:

(a) Whether he can require Pools R US to reconstruct the swimming pool in order to make it the agreed depth, and if not, what alternative action is available to him?

(b) What, if any, action can he take against Pools R US as a consequence of their failure to fit the chlorine free filter?

(c) Whether he can require Colin to undertake the work on the garden, and if not, what alternative action is available to him?