Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 47-274 (2026)

Express warranties of quality

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Express warranties made by any seller to a purchaser of a unit, if relied on by the purchaser, are created as follows:

(1) Any affirmation of fact or promise which relates to the unit, its use, or rights appurtenant thereto, area improvements to the common interest community that would directly benefit the unit, or the right to use or have the benefit of facilities not located in the common interest community, creates an express warranty that the unit, area improvements and related rights and uses will conform to the affirmation or promise;

(2) Any model or description of the physical characteristics of the common interest community, including plans and specifications of or for improvements, creates an express warranty that the common interest community will substantially conform to the model or description unless the model or description clearly discloses that it is only proposed or is subject to change;

(3) Any description of the quantity or extent of the real property comprising the common interest community, including surveys, creates an express warranty that the common interest community will conform to the description, subject to customary tolerances; and

(4) A provision that a purchaser may put a unit only to a specified use is an express warranty that the specified use is lawful.

(b) Neither formal words, such as “warranty” or “guarantee”, nor a specific intention to make a warranty, are necessary to create an express warranty of quality, but a statement purporting to be merely an opinion or commendation of the real property or its value does not create a warranty.

(c) Any conveyance of a unit transfers to the purchaser all express warranties of quality made by previous sellers only to the extent such a conveyance would transfer warranties pursuant to chapter 827.

(P.A. 83-474, S. 75, 96; P.A. 09-225, S. 42.)

History: P.A. 09-225 added “unless the model or description clearly discloses that it is only proposed or is subject to change” in Subsec. (a)(2), effective July 1, 2010.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2024 · leading case: Willow Springs Condo. Ass'n v. Seventh BRT Dev. Corp., 717 A.2d 77 (Conn. 1998).
Willow Springs Condo. Ass'n v. Seventh BRT Dev. Corp., 717 A.2d 77 (Conn. 1998). · cites it 6× “) the court failed to find that counts one and two, alleging breach of express and implied warranties pursuant to General Statutes §§ 47-274 and 47-275, were time barred by General Statutes § 47-277 in that (a) the court improperly allowed the jury to find an explicit extension…”
Winthrop House Ass'n v. Brookside Elm Ltd. Partners, 451 F. Supp. 2d 336 (D. Conn. 2005). · cites it 3× “Paragraph 10A of the POS contains a verbatim recitation of the provisions of Conn. Gen.Stat. § 47-274 (the CIOA’s provisions regarding the creation of express warranties of quality), a verbatim recitation of Conn.”
Pasco Common Condo. Assn., Inc. v. Benson (Conn. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 3× “General Statutes § 47-274 governs express warranties made by a seller to a purchaser of a unit, and General Statutes § 47-275 governs implied warranties made by a declarant to the purchaser of a unit as to the condition of the unit.”
Canner v. Governors Ridge Assn., Inc. (Conn. 2024). · cites it 2× “fraudulent claims by allowing persons after the lapse of a reasonable time, to plan their affairs with a reasonable degree of cer- tainty, free from the disruptive burden of protracted and unknown potential liability, and (2) to aid in the search for truth that may be impaired…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.