Clearfield County v. Transystems Corp., et al, No.193 C.D. 2024 (November 1, 2024)(Covey, J.)
Under Section 5536 of the Statute of Repose, an action cannot be brought in a construction claim more than 12 years after completion of the construction. The question is whether this applies where the plaintiff is in municipality. The doctrine of nullum tempus provides that the statute of limitations does bar an action brought by the state or its agency. Local governments or political subdivisions of the state are entitled to assert nullum tempus privilege under limited circumstances. Those circumstances are where the municipality’s claim (1) accrues to the municipality in its governmental capacity and (2) seeks to enforce an obligation imposed by law as distinguished from one arising out of an agreement voluntarily entered into by the defendant. The county has cited no authority so appointing its assertion of the doctrine of nullum tempus applied to the statute of repose in the same way that it does the statute of limitations. Therefore, the Commonwealth Court affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the action.
• Statute of repose in construction cases is 12 years.
• Nullum tempus says that the statute of limitations, not statute of repose, does not apply as against municipality.
• Nullum tempus does not apply in the construction context under Section 5536.
• Nullum tempus does not apply to the statute of repose, apparently the Court thinks at all.
