The Construction Defect Suit — Court Strategy
A construction defect case in court is won on three questions: whether the flaw is a defect, who failed in their role and why, and whether the deadlines remain. The first question is resolved by Article 641: a thing is defect-free if it conforms to the agreed conditions, and in their absence if it is fit for contractual or customary use; a different thing or a lesser quantity is also deemed a defect. In the suit this measure unfolds into evidence: the contract terms, the project, the technical documentation and the expert conclusion bind the flaw to the legal measure in one chain.
The second question — who and why — creates the second layer of evidence: the chronology of performance, the correspondence and the witness statements show where quality dropped and whose act caused it. The court assesses both layers together: first establishing the defect, then the liability. In preparation, both layers are therefore built in parallel, and each document seeks to answer both questions.
Defensive Positions — Articles 652 and 654
The contractor's side uses two main defenses. The first — the consequences of acceptance (Article 652): if the defect of the thing was known to the client and he nevertheless accepts it without declaring a claim, no rights of claim arise for him because of that defect. Recording objections in writing at acceptance is therefore a matter of survival. The second — deliberate concealment (Article 654): where the contractor deliberately conceals a defect, he cannot invoke an agreement excluding or limiting the client's rights because of the defect of the thing. This norm works for hidden flaws: establishing intent is an evidentiary question, and it is exactly there that informational advantage wins its significance.
The Battle of Deadlines — Articles 655 and 656
Deadlines are often decisive in a construction defect case: Article 655 provides that a claim for a defect of performance may be brought within one year, and a claim concerning a structure — within five years from the day of acceptance of the work. Article 656 refines the starting point: where under the contract the work is accepted in parts, the limitation period for a claim because of a defect starts from the day of the complete acceptance of the work. The documentary reconstruction of the moments of acceptance is therefore a central task of the suit: the acts, the staged handovers and the final acceptance must stand as one chronology.
Interaction with General Limitation — Article 129
Alongside the special periods the general regime operates: Article 129 provides that the limitation period for contractual claims is three years, and for contractual claims connected with immovable things — six years; for claims arising from obligations performed periodically the period is three years. In a construction dispute this construction means that other claims connected with the defect — for example, disputes over remuneration — stand on the general periods, while the claims for the defect itself are subject to the special periods of Article 655. Correct classification of the deadlines is part of the structure of the suit.
Preparing the Suit and the Lawyer's Role
The suit is built in three layers. The factual layer: the contract, the stages of performance, the acceptance acts, the record of the flaw. The legal layer: establishing the defect under Article 641, the mirror defenses of Articles 652 and 654, and the list of remedies. The temporal layer: the map of deadlines under Articles 655, 656 and 129. A lawyer assembles these layers into a single dossier: he assesses in advance the contractor's chances of defense, chooses the optimal combination of claims and preserves the deadlines. Experience shows that construction defect cases are won precisely on the quality of preparation — and preparation begins before the courtroom.
At the pre-trial stage two decisions are taken: the formulation of the disputed matter — what is the subject of the complaint and what remains in the sphere of negotiations — and the hierarchy of claims, where each claim obeys its own ground and deadline. A dossier built on these two decisions is read in court as ready argumentation, and the balance of forces between the parties is weighed exactly by this preparedness.
Frequently Asked Questions
Below we answer the questions most frequently asked about construction defect claims.
Which deadlines apply to a defect?
The classification of deadlines is part of the structure of the suit — each stands in one chronology.
What defensive positions does the builder have?
Articles 652 and 654 govern the defensive positions; answers to them are prepared in advance.
What role does informational advantage play?
The case file ties the flaw to the legal measure in one chain — documentation is decisive.
How does this interact with general limitation?
Article 129 governs the general limitation, and its interaction is assessed in advance.
How We Help on Legal.ge
A construction defect suit stands on chronology and documentation. The advocates of Legal.ge assist in computing the deadlines, building the position and representing you in court. Submit a request on the site.