Título 13. CONTRACTS · Capítulo 8. ILLEGAL AND VOID CONTRACTS GENERALLY · Artículo 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
13-8-2. Contracts contravening public policy generally.
Actualizado hasta: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly.
El texto siguiente es la ley tal como la imprime el estado, en inglés.
- (a)
A contract that is against the policy of the law cannot be enforced. Contracts deemed contrary to public policy include but are not limited to:#
- (1)
Contracts tending to corrupt legislation or the judiciary;#
- (2)
Contracts in general restraint of trade, as distinguished from contracts which restrict certain competitive activities, as provided in Article 4 of this chapter;#
- (3)
Contracts to evade or oppose the revenue laws of another country;#
- (4)
Wagering contracts; or#
- (5)
Contracts of maintenance or champerty.#
- (b)
A covenant, promise, agreement, or understanding in or in connection with or collateral to a contract or agreement relative to the construction, alteration, repair, or maintenance of a building structure, appurtenances, and appliances, including moving, demolition, and excavating connected therewith, purporting to require that one party to such contract or agreement shall indemnify, hold harmless, insure, or defend the other party to the contract or other named indemnitee, including its, his, or her officers, agents, or employees, against liability or claims for damages, losses, or expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of bodily injury to persons, death, or damage to property caused by or resulting from the sole negligence of the indemnitee, or its, his, or her officers, agents, or employees, is against public policy and void and unenforceable. This subsection shall not affect any obligation under workers’ compensation or coverage or insurance specifically relating to workers’ compensation, nor shall this subsection apply to any requirement that one party to the contract purchase a project specific insurance policy, including an owner’s or contractor’s protective insurance, builder’s risk insurance, installation coverage, project management protective liability insurance, an owner controlled insurance policy, or a contractor controlled insurance policy.#
- (c)
A covenant, promise, agreement, or understanding in or in connection with or collateral to a contract or agreement for engineering, architectural, or land surveying services purporting to require that one party to such contract or agreement shall indemnify, hold harmless, insure, or defend the other party to the contract or other named indemnitee, including its, his, or her officers, agents, or employees, against liability or claims for damages, losses, or expenses, including attorney fees, is against public policy and void and unenforceable, except for indemnification for damages, losses, or expenses to the extent caused by or resulting from the negligence, recklessness, or intentionally wrongful conduct of the indemnitor or other persons employed or utilized by the indemnitor in the performance of the contract. This subsection shall not affect any obligation under workers’ compensation or coverage or insurance specifically relating to workers’ compensation, nor shall this subsection apply to any requirement that one party to the contract purchase a project specific insurance policy or project specific policy endorsement.#
Nota de lectura: una palabra dividida en dos líneas en el volumen impreso se unió por regla y no pudo comprobarse contra el vocabulario del propio volumen. La página oficial enlazada abajo resuelve cualquier duda.
History
Orig. Code 1863, § 2714; Code 1868, § 2708; Code 1873, § 2750; Code 1882, § 2750; Civil Code 1895, § 3668; Civil Code 1910, § 4253; Code 1933, § 20-504; Ga. L. 1970, p. 441, § 1; Ga. L. 1982, p. 3, § 13; Ga. L. 1989, p. 14, § 13; Ga. L. 1990, p. 1676, § 1; Ga. L. 2007, p. 208, § 1/HB 136; Ga. L. 2009, p. 231, § 1/HB 173; Ga. L. 2011, p. 399, § 2/HB 30; Ga. L. 2016, p. 205, § 1/HB 943.
Amendments
The 2011 amendment, effective May 11, 2011, in subsection (a), substituted “that” for “which” in the first sentence of paragraph (a)(1) and substituted “contracts which restrict certain competitive activities, as provided in Article 4 of this chapter” for “contracts in partial restraint of trade as provided for in Code Section 13-8-2.1” in paragraph (a)(2). See Editor’s notes for applicability. The 2016 amendment, effective July 1, 2016, added subsection (c).
Editor's notes
Ga. L. 2009, p. 231, § 4, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that the 2009 amendment becomes effective on the day following the ratification at the time of the 2010 general election of an amendment to the Constitution of Georgia providing for the enforcement of covenants in commercial contracts that limit competition and shall apply to contracts entered into on and after such date and shall not apply in actions determining the enforceability of restrictive covenants entered into before such date and that if such amendment is not so ratified, then this amendment shall stand automatically repealed. The constitutional amendment (Ga. L. 2010, p. 1260) was ratified at the general election held on November 2, 2010. Ga. L. 2011, p. 399, § 1, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: “During the 2009 legislative session the General Assembly enacted HB 173 (Act No. 64, Ga. L. 2009, p. 231), which was a bill that dealt with the issue of restrictive covenants in contracts and which was contingently effective on the passage of a constitutional amendment. During the 2010 legislative session the General Assembly enacted HR 178 (Ga. L. 2010, p. 1260), the constitutional amendment necessary for the statutory language of HB 173 (Act No. 64, Ga. L. 2009, p. 231), and the voters ratified the constitutional amendment on November 2, 2010. It has been suggested by certain parties that because of the effective date provisions of HB 173 (Act No. 64, Ga. L. 2009, p. 231), there may be some question about the validity of that legislation. It is the intention of this Act to remove any such uncertainty by substantially reenacting the substantive provisions of HB 173 (Act No. 64, Ga. L. 2009, p. 231), but the enactment of this Act should not be taken as evidence of a legislative determination that HB 173 (Act No. 64, Ga. L. 2009, p. 231) was in fact invalid.” Ga. L. 2011, p. 399, § 5, not codified by the General Assembly, provides, in part, that the amendment to this Code section shall apply to contracts entered into on and after May 11, 2011, and shall not apply in actions determining the enforceability of restrictive covenants entered into before May 11, 2011.
Law reviews
For annual survey of law on construction law, see 62 Mercer L. Rev. 71 (2010). For annual survey of law on labor and employment law, see 62 Mercer L. Rev. 181 (2010). For article on the 2011 amendment of this Code section, see 28 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 21 (2011). For annual survey on construction law, see 64 Mercer L. Rev. 71 (2012). For annual survey on labor and employment law, see 66 Mercer L. Rev. 121 (2014). For note, “Laissez Fair: The Case for Alternative Litigation Funding and Assignment of Lawsuit Proceeds in Georgia,” see 49 Ga. L. Rev. 1121 (2015). For annual survey on construction law, see 68 Mercer L. Rev. 83 (2016). For article, “Construction Law,” see 70 Mercer L. Rev. 51 (2018). For annual survey on real property law, see 70 Mercer L. Rev. 209 (2018). For annual survey on construction law, see 71 Mercer L. Rev. 57 (2019). For article, “Is Liberal Enforcement of Noncompetes Still Good Policy?,” see 26 Ga. St. B.J. 26 (Oct. 2020). For article with annual survey on construction law, see 73 Mercer L. Rev. 59 (2021).
Leer la página oficial (el PDF del estado, abierto en la página de la que se leyó este texto).
Actualizado hasta: Including Acts of the 2025 Regular Session of the General Assembly.
Texto leído de t13-(v11)-pdf.pdf, Volumen V11, edición 2010, suplemento de 2025, páginas 116 a 118; acción de fusión: replaced; SHA-256 del archivo 6acfbda3d9fa.