Main Page Not logged inLogin

For questions, changes or clarifications regarding the Construction Claims Resources, please contact

Last Reviewed / Modified On 13 Apr 2018.

CONNECTICUT CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS RESOURCES

Construction Claims

Limitations & Repose Periods

Statute of Limitations for Breach of Construction Contract:

Oral Contracts, if still executory: Action must be commenced within three (3) years. C.G.S.A. § 52-581.

Written Contracts and Executed Oral Contracts: Action must be commenced within six (6) years. C.G.S.A. § 52-576.

  1. Accrual date. The statute of limitations accrues when the breach occurs or when injury is inflicted (Beckenstein v. Potter & Carrier, Inc., 464 A.2d 18, 22 (Conn. 1983)). The statute of limitations will still accrue even if the injured party is ignorant of the fact that he has been damaged (Amoco Oil Co. v. Liberty Auto and Elec. Co., 810 A.2d 259, 266 (Conn. 2002)).

Tort: Connecticut imposes a three (3) year limitations period for tort actions. Conn. Gen. Stat. §52-577.

Third-Party Contribution: Action must be commenced within one (1) year. C.G.S.A. § 52-572o.                      

Claims for Negligent Construction:

Action must be brought within four (4) years from date of substantial completion of work. C.G.S.A. § 52-576.

Statute of Repose

Construction: Seven (7) Years from substantial completion to improvement to real property for actions brought against any architect, professional engineer or land surveyor. C.G.S.A. § 52-584a.

Negligence/Personal Injury: “No action to recover damages for injury to the person, or to real or personal property, caused by negligence, or by reckless or wanton misconduct, or by malpractice of a physician, surgeon, dentist, podiatrist, chiropractor, hospital or sanatorium, shall be brought but within two years from the date when the injury is first sustained or discovered or in the exercise of reasonable care should have been discovered, and except that no such action may be brought more than three years from the date of the act or omission complained of, except that a counterclaim may be interposed in any such action any time before the pleadings in such action are finally closed.” C.G.S.A. § 52-584.

Trigger of Coverage

Connecticut follows the “injury-in-fact” rule to determine which liability policies have been triggered. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Abbott Lab. Inc., 636 F. Supp. 546 (D. Conn. 1986).

Right to Repair Laws and/or Pre-Suit Statutory Procedures

There is no right to repair in Connecticut.

Indemnity and Contribution

As a general rule, indemnity agreements are enforceable and not contrary to public policy under Connecticut law. See Amoco Oil Co. v. Liberty Auto & Electric Co., 262 Conn. 142 (2002); Bakker v. Brave Industries, Inc., 48 Conn. Supp. 70 (2002).

Connecticut courts disfavor contractual provisions that relieve an individual from liability for his own negligence. See, Griffin v. Nationwide Moving & Storage Co., Inc., 187 Conn. 405, 413 (1982) (citing Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 195, cmt. b).

C.G.S.A. § 52-584 provides “(a) Any covenant, promise, agreement or understanding entered into in connection with or collateral to a contract or agreement relative to the construction, alteration, repair or maintenance of any building, structure or appurtenances thereto . . . that purports to indemnify or hold harmless the promisee against liability for damage arising out of bodily injury to persons or damage to property caused by or resulting from the negligence of such promisee . . . is against public policy and void . . .”

As between joint tortfeasors, there is ordinarily no right of indemnity. See Kyrtatas v. Stop & Shop, Inc., 205 Conn. 694, 697 (1988).

  1. In order to recover common law indemnity from a codefendant, one must establish four elements: (1) that the other tortfeasor was negligent; (2) that his negligence, rather than the plaintiff’s, was the direct, immediate cause of the accident and injuries; (3) that he was in control of the situation to the exclusion of the plaintiff; and (4) that the plaintiff did not know of such negligence, had no reason to anticipate it, and could reasonably rely on the other tortfeasor not to be negligent.

Certificate of Merit — Experts

In Connecticut, there is no requirement for filing certificate or affidavit of merit for claims against design or construction professionals.

Economic Loss Doctrine

Purely economic losses are unrecoverable in tort where the relationship between the parties is purely contractual. See United Steel, Inc. v. Spiegel, Zamecnik & Shah, Inc., X09CV065001846, 2007 WL 1532726 (Conn. Super. Mar. 27, 2007) (Shortall, J.).

While no Connecticut appellate courts have applied the doctrine to construction defect cases, trial courts have.

One trial court reasoned that use of the doctrine is most compelling “when the parties are sophisticated corporations who entered into a contract involving a major construction project.” See Morganti National, Inc. v. Greenwich Hospital Association, 2001 WL1249807 (Conn. Super. 2001).

  1. Application of the economic loss doctrine in construction context would require parties to stick to the terms of their contracts, and to recover damages in accordance with contract law alone

Contractor Licensing Requirements

“New Home Construction Contractors Act,” requires a contractor to obtain a certificate of registration before he may engage in the construction of a new home. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 20-417b.

  1. Additionally, it provides for three distinct penalties for noncompliance: (1) a civil penalty, (2) a criminal penalty, and (3) a penalty pursuant to unfair or deceptive trade practices. Conn. Gen. Stats. §§ 20-417e-g.

The “Home Improvement Act” also provides regulation relating to the licensing of contractors. It additionally provides the required terms of a home improvement contract as well as “a provision explicitly invalidating and declaring unenforceable contracts entered into by an unregistered contractor.” See D’Angelo Dev. & Constr. Co. v. Cordovano, 278 Conn. 237, 246 (2006).

Connecticut differentiates between “major contractor” from “minor contractor”. A major contractor is licensed to work on institutional residences (care homes, jails, etc.), hotels/motels, multi-family residences, and other large sites. A minor contractor is licensed to work on private homes and small multi-family units. A license is needed if the job exceeds $200.00 for a single job or if the yearly work exceeds $1,000.00 total.

Common Law & Statutory Claims

NA

Construction Damages

Cost of Repair

The basic measure of damages for injury to real property is the resultant diminution in its value. See Willow Springs Condo. Ass'n v. Seventh BRT Dev. Corp., 245 Conn. 1, 59 (1998). The diminution in value may be determined by the cost of repairing the damage, provided that the cost does not exceed the former value of the property and that the repairs do not enhance the value of the property over what it was before it was damaged.

Diminution in Value

The diminution in value may be determined by the cost of repairing the damage, provided that the cost does not exceed the former value of the property and that the repairs do not enhance the value of the property over what it was before it was damaged. See Willow Springs Condo. Ass'n v. Seventh BRT Dev. Corp., 245 Conn. 1, 59 (1998).

Punitive Damages

Generally, recovery of punitive damages is not permitted for breach of contract cases. See Barry v. Posi-Seal Int’l, 40 Conn. App. 577, 584, 588 (1996).

i.The few classes of cases in which such damages have been allowed contain elements which bring them within the field of tort. See Triangle Sheet Metal Works, Inc. v. Silver, 154 Conn. 116, 127 (1966).

Attorney's Fees

Where a contract contains a clause which explicitly provides for the recovery of attorney’s fees, such an award “requires an evidentiary showing of reasonableness . . . .” Celentano v. Oaks Condo. Ass’n, 265 Conn. 579, 619 (2003) (quoting Rizzo Pool Co. v. Del Grosso, 240 Conn. 58, 77 (1997)). A trial court “may rely on its own general knowledge of the trial itself to supply evidence in support of an award of attorney’s fees.”

Joint and Several Liability (specific to construction)

As between joint tortfeasors, there is ordinarily no right of indemnity. See Kyrtatas v. Stop & Shop, Inc., 205 Conn. 694, 697 (1988).

Cost Incurred to Access Repair Areas

NA

Consequential Damages

A buyer is entitled to consequential damages equivalent to the diminution in value between the property had it been as represented and the property as it actually was. See Johnson v. Healy, 176 Conn. 97, 106 (Conn. 1978).

^ Back to Top