657-8 Limitation of action for damages based on construction to improve real property. (a) No action to recover damages for any injury to property, real or personal, or for bodily injury or wrongful death, arising out of any deficiency or neglect in the planning, design, construction, supervision and administering of construction, and observation of construction relating to an improvement to real property shall be commenced more than two years after the cause of action has accrued, but in any event not more than ten years after the date of completion of the improvement.

(b) This section shall not apply to actions for damages against owners or other persons having an interest in the real property or improvement based on their negligent conduct in the repair or maintenance of the improvement or to actions for damages against surveyors for their own errors in boundary surveys. The term "improvement" as used in this section shall have the same meaning as in section 507-41 and the phrase "date of completion" as used in this section shall mean the time when there has been substantial completion of the improvement or the improvement has been abandoned. The filing of an affidavit of publication and notice of completion with the circuit court where the property is situated in compliance with section 507-43(f) shall be prima facie evidence of the date of completion. This section shall not be construed to prevent, limit, or extend any shorter period of limitation applicable to sureties provided for in any contract or bond or any other statute, nor to extend or add to the liability of any surety beyond that for which the surety agreed to be liable by contract or bond.

(c) Nothing in this section shall exclude or limit the liability provisions as set forth in the products liability laws. [L 1967, c 194, 1; HRS 657-8; am L 1972, c 133, 1; am L 1974, c 73, 1; am L 1979, c 185, 1; am L 1980, c 70, 2 and c 232, 34; am L 1983, c 120, 1; am L 1994, c 164, 1]

 

Cross References

 

Contractor repair act, see chapter 672E.

Statute of limitations; recovery from contractors recovery fund, see 444-28.

 

Case Notes

 

Where defendant argued statute of limitations set forth in pre-1994 version of this section barred plaintiffs' suit, plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence to create genuine issue of material fact as to their claim that statute of limitations should be equitably tolled as a result of defendant's alleged misleading conduct. 930 F. Supp. 1411 (1996).

In granting immunity to certain persons, section prior to 1974 amendment was declared violative of equal protection guaranty. 55 H. 7, 514 P.2d 568 (1973).

Homeowner's suit not barred because rights matured before 1972 amendments took effect. 64 H. 80, 636 P.2d 1348 (1981).

Section held violative of equal protection. 65 H. 26, 647 P.2d 276 (1982).

 

 

Previous Vol13_Ch0601-0676 Next