Courts - Prohibited Indemnity and Defense Liability Agreements
The enactment of SB31 aims to enforce public policy by ensuring that professionals in the fields of architecture and engineering are not unduly burdened with defense costs for claims arising from their clients' negligence. It clarifies the legal framework surrounding indemnity agreements, reinforcing that such clauses cannot be enforced if they seek to protect parties from their own negligence. This change is expected to provide a fairer operating environment for service providers, ensuring accountability remains with the party at fault.
Senate Bill 31, titled 'Courts - Prohibited Indemnity and Defense Liability Agreements,' proposes to amend Article - Courts and Judicial Proceedings by prohibiting certain provisions in contracts related to architectural, engineering, inspecting, or surveying services. Specifically, it seeks to void any agreement that requires a service provider to defend another party against liability or claims arising from the service provider's sole negligence. This bill addresses concerns regarding liability shifts that may disadvantage service providers, placing the risk on them for others' negligence.
Despite the intended benefits, some members of the community may view this bill as a shift that could reduce the accountability of clients who engage these services. Critics may argue that without the ability to indemnify against negligence, clients could face less pressure to maintain high standards of care, potentially increasing risks within construction and engineering projects. The discussion around this bill highlights the balance between protecting professionals from fully bearing the liability for unforeseen events and ensuring clients uphold their responsibility within contractual relationships.