H.B. 227 Enrolled

PROPERTY SURVEY - STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS
1997 GENERAL SESSION
STATE OF UTAH
Sponsor: Gerry A. Adair
AN ACT RELATING TO THE JUDICIAL CODE; PROVIDING A DEFINITION OF
COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENT FOR AN ACTION BASED ON A SURVEY; AND
MAKING TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.
This act affects sections of Utah Code Annotated 1953 as follows:
AMENDS:
78-12-25.5, as repealed and reenacted by Chapter 290, Laws of Utah 1991
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the state of Utah:
Section 1. Section 78-12-25.5 is amended to read:
78-12-25.5. Actions related to improvements in real property.
(1) As used in this section:
(a) "Action" means any claim for judicial, arbitral, or administrative relief for acts, errors,
omissions, or breach of duty that causes injury to persons or property, whether based in tort,
contract, warranty, strict liability, indemnity, contribution, or other source of law[;].
(b) "Completion of improvement" means the date of substantial completion of an
improvement to real property as established by the earliest of:
(i) a Certificate of Substantial Completion[,];
(ii) a Certificate of Occupancy issued by a governing agency[, or];
(iii) the date of first use or possession of the improvement[, whichever is earliest;]; or
(iv) the date the map of the survey is filed under Section 17-23-17 with respect to real
property.
(c) "Improvement" means any building, structure, infrastructure, road, utility, or other
similar man-made change, addition, modification, or alteration to real property[;].
(d) "Person" means an individual, corporation, partnership, joint venture, association,
proprietorship, or any other legal or governmental entity[; and].

(e) "Provider" means any person contributing to, providing, or performing studies, plans,
specifications, drawings, designs, value engineering, cost or quantity estimates, [topographic]
surveys, staking, construction, and the review, observation, administration, management,
supervision, inspections, and tests of construction for or in relation to an improvement.
(2) The Legislature finds that:
(a) exposing a provider to suits and liability for acts, errors, omissions, or breach of duty
after the possibility of injury or damage has become highly remote and unexpectedly creates costs
and hardships to the provider and the citizens of the state;
(b) these costs and hardships include liability insurance costs, records storage costs, undue
and unlimited liability risks during the life of both a provider and an improvement, and difficulties
in defending against claims many years after completion of an improvement;
(c) these costs and hardships constitute clear social and economic evils;
(d) the possibility of injury and damage becomes highly remote and unexpected as to claims
for breach of contract or warranty six years following completion of the improvement or the
abandonment of construction and, as to all other claims, ten years following completion or
abandonment;
(e) it is in the best interests of the citizens of the state to impose the periods of repose
provided in this chapter; and
(f) it is in the best interests of the citizens of this state to impose a period of limitation
requiring that an action against a provider be brought within a [two] five-year period following
discovery of the act, error, omission, or breach of duty that forms the basis of the action.
(3) (a) An action against a provider shall be commenced within [two] five years from the
date of discovery of the act, error, omission, or breach of duty or the date upon which the act, error,
omission, or breach of duty should have been discovered through reasonable diligence.
(b) If the act, error, omission, or breach of duty is discovered or discoverable before
completion of the improvement or abandonment of construction, the [two] five-year period begins
to run upon completion or abandonment.
(4) Subject to Subsection (3), no action for breach of contract or warranty may be

- 2 -

commenced against a provider more than six years after completion of the improvement or
abandonment of construction. In the event the act, error, omission, or breach of duty is discovered
in the first through the sixth year of the six-year period, the injured person has [two] five additional
years from the date of discovery to commence an action.
(5) Subject to Subsections (3) and (4), no action may be commenced against a provider more
than 12 years after completion of the improvement or abandonment of construction. In the event the
act, error, omission, or breach of duty is discovered in the seventh through the twelfth year of the
12-year period, the injured person shall have [two] five additional years from the date of discovery
to commence an action.
(6) Subsections (4) and (5) do not apply to an action against a provider:
(a) who has fraudulently concealed the act, error, omission, or breach of duty;
(b) for a willful or intentional act, error, omission, or breach of duty; or
(c) for breach of a written express warranty where the warranty period extends beyond six
years as provided in Subsection (4).
(7) If a person otherwise entitled to bring an action did not commence the action within the
periods prescribed by Subsections (4) and (5) solely because that person was a minor or mentally
incompetent and without a legal guardian, that person shall have two years from the date the
disability is removed to commence the action.
(8) The time limitation imposed by this section shall not apply to any action against any
person in actual possession or control of the improvement as owner, tenant, or otherwise, at the time
any defective or unsafe condition of the improvement proximately causes the injury for which the
action is brought.
(9) This section does not extend the period of limitation or repose otherwise prescribed by
law or a valid and enforceable contract.
(10) This section applies to all claims and causes of action that accrue after April 29, 1991,
notwithstanding that the act, error, omission, or breach of duty occurred, or the improvement was
completed or abandoned before April 29, 1991.

- 3 -