Question 1

Natalia purchased a used 12 foot slide for her above ground swimming pool (which was 4 feet deep) from Hank for $200.00 in response to his Kijiji ad. Hank explained that he had recently removed his in-ground pool and that the slide would probably require new fittings and hoses since it was 10 years old.

Before installing the slide, Natalia took it to her pool store, Aqua Blue Pools (the "Pool Experts") to purchase new fittings and hoses. She had been a customer of Aqua Blue Pools for 2 years. She asked the employees of Aqua Blue Pools if it would be "all right" or "okay" to use the slide with her pool and was assured that there would be "no problem".

Natalia testified that if she had been told by Aqua Blue Pools that it was not safe to use the slide she would not have installed it, even though she had already bought it.

After installing the slide, Natalia instructed her 14 year old son, Pietro how to use it, specifically telling him that it was a rule (among others) that he and his friends could only descend the slide feet first.

Pietro had a pool party the next weekend. After watching several of his friends descend the slide face first - just like at Canada's Wonderland - Pietro also entered the water head first. Unfortunately he hit his chin on the bottom of the pool, rendering him paraplegic.

Natalia and Pietro sued Hank, Aqua Blue Pools and Slideco Ltd., the manufacturer of the slide, for damages of $5,000,000.00 claiming that they failed to warn them of the danger of catastrophic injury due to the use of the slide with a 4 foot pool. They alleged that all parties were guilty of negligent misrepresentation or a negligent failure to warn them of the hidden danger.

Hank claimed he had sold Natalia a slide for $200.00. What she did with it was her business and had nothing to do with him. Hank had used the slide for 10 years without an accident.

Slideco claimed that at the time of the initial sale, a warning label was affixed to the reverse side of the slide which read:"Enter water feet first""One person only on the slide at a time".The label had deterioratedand was difficult to read and had not been noticed by Natalia. As well, Slideco said it didn't owe Natalia or Pietro a duty of care and it was Pietro's actions that caused the injury.

Aqua Blue Pools claimed that it was not responsible for what its employees had said and, in any event, pool rules were up to the pool owner.

Required: Analyse the issues that will be raised by the parties with reference to the elements of a tortaction. Be certain to explain the applicable legal principles as part of your answer. What is the likely result? Pietro has not sued his mother, Natalia. Should he?