2009•Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and ConstructionRequires access

Limitation of Liability Clause Violates Anti-Indemnity Statute

Edmund V. Caplicki

Open publisher page 3 citations

Abstract

Many large civil engineering projects find the project’s engineers earning fees that are a small fraction of the ultimate cost of the project, and similarly, a small fraction of the potential liability arising out of the engineering for the project. To mitigate this risk, some engineering contracts include a limitation of liability clause that limits an owner’s claims against the engineer to a maximum amount—for example, the fee or available insurance. To reap the benefits of such provisions, it is important that they be drafted in such way as to comply with the peculiarities of the law of the jurisdiction governing the contract. The engineering firm in Lanier at McEver, L.P. v. Planners and Engineers Collaborative, Inc. 2008 belatedly discovered that the terms of its particular limitation of liability clause ran afoul of Georgia’s anti-indemnity statute.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Many large civil engineering projects find the project’s engineers earning fees that are a small fraction of the ultimate cost of the project, and similarly, a small fraction of the potential liability arising out of the engineering for the project. To mitigate this risk, some engineering contracts include a limitation of liability clause that limits an owner’s claims against the engineer to a maximum amount—for example, the fee or available insurance. To reap the benefits of such provisions, it is important that they be drafted in such way as to comply with the peculiarities of the law of the jurisdiction governing the contract. The engineering firm in Lanier at McEver, L.P. v. Planners and Engineers Collaborative, Inc. 2008 belatedly discovered that the terms of its particular limitation of liability clause ran afoul of Georgia’s anti-indemnity statute.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Many large civil engineering projects find the project’s engineers earning fees that are a small fraction of the ultimate cost of the project, and similarly, a small fraction of the potential liability arising out of the engineering for the project. To mitigate this risk, some engineering contracts include a limitation of liability clause that limits an owner’s claims against the engineer to a maximum amount—for example, the fee or available insurance. To reap the benefits of such provisions, it is important that they be drafted in such way as to comply with the peculiarities of the law of the jurisdiction governing the contract. The engineering firm in Lanier at McEver, L.P. v. Planners and Engineers Collaborative, Inc. 2008 belatedly discovered that the terms of its particular limitation of liability clause ran afoul of Georgia’s anti-indemnity statute.

Key concepts: Indemnity, Statute, Liability, Business, Law, Law and economics, Actuarial science, Economics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Limitation of Liability Clause Violates Anti-Indemnity Statute — Research Paper | ScholarLens