Will a Connecticut court enforce a clause sending a construction dispute to another state's courts or arbitrators?
Not for a Connecticut construction site: any provision in a construction contract for work on a construction site located in Connecticut that purports to require that any dispute arising under the contract be mediated, arbitrated or otherwise adjudicated in or under the laws of a state other than Connecticut is void and of no effect, regardless of whether the contract was executed in Connecticut (§ 42-158m). 'Construction contract' is defined in § 42-158i as a contract for construction, renovation or rehabilitation in Connecticut on or after October 1, 1999, and excludes public works or other building contracts with the state, the United States, another state or a municipality, HUD-funded or HUD-insured contracts or projects, owner-contractor contracts of $25,000 or less and the subcontracts that result from them, and buildings intended for residential occupancy containing four or fewer units. In an action to enforce § 42-158m a court may award court costs and reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party (§ 42-158r).
The trap
The statute voids the forum and the chosen law together, and it cannot be avoided by signing the contract outside Connecticut. The statutory rule itself covers § 42-158m and the two sections that bound and enforce it. Outside construction, Connecticut's general rule is different and is stated here too: a forum selection clause does not oust a court of jurisdiction, and courts enforce such clauses 'as long as they were reasonable by declining to exercise jurisdiction' over an action (Reiner, Reiner & Bendett, P.C. v. Cadle Co., 2006, adopting Bremen), with the Supreme Court's earlier statement that 'Absent a showing of fraud or overreaching, such forum clauses will be enforced by the courts' (United States Trust Co. v. Bohart, 1985), subject to the limit that jurisdiction may not be asserted so as to make litigation so gravely difficult and inconvenient that a party is unfairly at a severe disadvantage.
6 authorities
- statuteConn. Gen. Stat. § 42-158menactment date not established
The words that state the rule
Any provision in a construction contract for the performance of work on a construction site located in this state that purports to require that any dispute arising under the construction contract be mediated, arbitrated or otherwise adjudicated in or under the laws of a state other than Connecticut shall be void and of no effect, regardless of whether the construction contract was executed in this state.
- statuteConn. Gen. Stat. § 42-158ienactment date not established
The words that state the rule
As used in sections 42-158i to 42-158n , inclusive, unless the context otherwise requires: (1) “Owner” means any individual, corporation, nonprofit corporation, partnership, limited partnership, limited liability company or other business entity that is the owner of record or lessee of real property upon which construction, renovation or rehabilitation is to be or is being performed pursuant to a construction contract regarding such real property. (2) “Construction contract” or “contract” means any contract for the construction, renovation or rehabilitation in this state on or after October 1, 1999, including any improvements to real property that are associated with such construction, renovation or rehabilitation, or any subcontract for construction, renovation or rehabilitation between an owner and a contractor, or between a contractor and a subcontractor or subcontractors, or between a subcontractor and any other subcontractor. “Construction contract” or “contract” does not include (A) any public works or other building contract entered into with this state, the United States, any other state, and any municipality or other political subdivision of this state or any other state, (B) a contract or project funded or insured by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, (C) a contract between an owner and a contractor for an amount of twenty-five thousand dollars or less or a subcontract which results from such a contract, or (D) a contract for a building intended for residential occupancy containing four or less units.
- statuteConn. Gen. Stat. § 42-158renactment date not established
The words that state the rule
In an action to enforce the provisions of section 42-158k , 42-158m or 42-158p , a court may award court costs and reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party.
The words that state the rule
This basic tenet of foreseeability has given rise to the specific *42 corollary that “parties to a contract may agree in advance to submit to the jurisdiction of a given court . . . .” National Rental v. Szukhent, 375 U.S. 311, 315-16 , 84 S. Ct. 411 , 11 L. Ed. 2d 354 (1964). Absent a showing of fraud or overreaching, such forum clauses will be enforced by the courts. The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1, 10-12 , 92 S. Ct. 1907 , 32 L. Ed. 2d 513 (1972). At the same time, jurisdiction may not be asserted “in such a way as to make litigation ‘so gravely difficult and inconvenient’ that a party unfairly is at a ‘severe disadvantage’ in comparison to his opponent.”
The words that state the rule
In more recent years, however, courts have concluded that forum selection clauses do not oust courts of their jurisdiction, but they have been willing to enforce such contract clauses as long as they were reasonable by declining to exercise jurisdiction over an action in certain circumstances.
The words that state the rule
We are persuaded by the reasoning of the United States Supreme Court in Bremen , and conclude that the Ohio forum selection clause did not divest the trial court of personal jurisdiction over the defendant.
“Defective” means that reading found something to correct. What you are reading is the rule as it stands after that reading.