The defects liability period is the contractually agreed window after handover during which the contractor must come back and put right defects that appear in the building. It is not a guarantee that the building was finished, and it is not the same as the tenant’s rights under Slovak law, which sit behind it and run longer. For an occupier the period is only as good as three things: the list agreed on the day of handover, the money still held back, and the wording that says who calls the contractor.
What the defects liability period actually covers
It covers the return visit, not the original build quality. Handover under an international construction contract does not mean the building is perfect. Under the FIDIC forms, as Fasken’s guide to the taking-over clauses explains, the certificate records the date on which the works were completed except for any minor outstanding work and defects which will not substantially affect the use of the works for their intended purpose. Something is therefore expected to be outstanding on day one. The window that follows is where those known items get finished and where new faults, once notified, get remedied at the contractor’s cost. Two categories run in parallel and are constantly mixed up. Snagging items are the things already visible at handover and written down: a dock leveller out of alignment, a roof light that leaks, an unfinished yard marking. Latent defects appear later, when the building has been used through a winter and a peak season. The first group is closed by the list. The second is closed only by the clock, and by whoever still has money withheld when the fault shows up.
How long the window runs, and what can extend it
The length is a commercial term rather than a legal constant. In Slovak industrial developments a range of twelve to twenty-four months from handover is what we see most often, with mechanical and electrical plant sometimes carrying its own shorter or longer terms. That range is market practice, not a rule, which is why it belongs in the negotiation rather than in an assumption. Where the project runs on a FIDIC form the mechanics are more defined. The period is stated in the contract data as a number of days, and it can be extended when a part of the works cannot be used because of a defect. The extension is capped. The IBA paper on the 2017 conditions puts it plainly: sub-clause 11.3 states that no defects notification period may be extended for more than two years. The 2017 forms also added a cut-off for plant, with no liability where a defect or damage occurs more than two years after the end of the period for that plant. That matters more than it sounds, because the same paper notes that the 1999 forms never clearly ended the contractor’s obligation to remedy, so in practice it ran on into the statutory limitation period. Read your contract for which of the two positions you are in.
What Slovak law adds behind the contract
A separate layer, with longer outer limits and a much harder notification duty. DLA Piper’s country guidance on construction liability sets out the rule that governs a Slovak works contract: the court will not allow the client any remedy in respect of defects in the work or building if the client does not notify the defects without delay after they are detected, without delay after the obligatory inspection is carried out, or without delay after the defects could have been detected exercising due care. The outer limits are two years after the work is handed over, and five years in the case of buildings. Two consequences follow. First, the statutory five-year window for a building is longer than most contractual periods, so a defect discovered in year three is not automatically hopeless. Second, and far more dangerous in practice, the remedy can be lost long before that outer limit simply by sitting on the knowledge. The same guidance notes that the client is bound to inspect the work or arrange for its inspection as soon as possible after handover. A facilities team that logs a fault in a maintenance system and does not notify anyone has not preserved the claim. On our reading, that notification discipline is the part occupiers underestimate most.
What a tenant should record on the day of handover
Everything that will be argued about later, while both parties are still in the building. The snagging list is the first item: a written, jointly signed schedule with a deadline against each entry and a named person on each side. Photographs and a dated schedule of condition come second, covering floor slab, roof, dock equipment, yard surface and services. Meter readings and commissioning certificates come third, because a heating or sprinkler system that was never properly commissioned is a defect that only reveals itself in the season it was designed for. Then the documents: as-built drawings, operation and maintenance manuals, warranties assigned or confirmed, and the contact route for calling the contractor back. That last point is where tenants in leased buildings lose most often. The construction contract sits between the developer and the contractor, and the tenant is not a party to it. Unless the lease says the landlord will pursue defects on the tenant’s behalf, or the relevant warranties are assigned, the occupier with the leaking roof has a landlord to ask and no contractor to call.
The clauses to fix before the certificate is issued
Four, and all of them are cheaper to agree before handover than after. First, the route to the contractor: a clear obligation on the landlord to enforce the construction contract for defects affecting the tenant’s use, with a time limit for acting. Second, the money. Retention held back against the works, or a bank guarantee that survives until the end of the window, is the only reason a contractor returns quickly for a job with no further revenue attached. Third, the interaction with rent and service charge: what happens if a defect makes part of the building unusable, whether rent abates, and an explicit statement that remedying construction defects is not an item the service charge may recover. Fourth, the interaction with the tenant’s own works. Fit-out installed over a defective slab complicates every later argument about cause, so agree how the responsibilities separate before anyone drills into the floor. The timing argument is on the occupier’s side right now. With 105,159 square metres delivered in the first quarter of 2026 across eight buildings, deliveries entering the market with half the space available and 203,200 square metres under construction at only 35 per cent pre-lease, a developer has more reason to accept a tight snagging regime than it did two years ago.
Frequently Asked Questions
When does the defects liability period start?
At handover, not at the date the building was physically finished and not at the occupancy certificate. That is why the certificate date is worth checking rather than accepting: every month of drift moves the end of the window with it.
Is the period the same as a warranty?
Not quite. The contractual window obliges the contractor to return and remedy within an agreed time. Product warranties on roofing, doors or plant are separate promises from separate suppliers, often for longer terms, and they are worth collecting and confirming at handover rather than discovering later.
What happens to defects found after the window closes?
The contractual route is gone, but the statutory position may not be. In Slovakia the outer limit for buildings is five years from handover, subject to the duty to notify without delay once a defect is detected or could have been detected with due care.
Can a tenant enforce the period directly against the contractor?
Usually not. The tenant is not a party to the construction contract, so the practical routes are an obligation on the landlord to enforce it, an assignment of the relevant warranties, or a collateral warranty. If none of the three is in the lease, the occupier has no direct claim.