Florida Contractor Practice Exam

Which of the following is NOT an example of an exculpatory clause?

1. The owner is to indemnify the contractor.

2. The contractor is to hold the owner harmless.

3. The contractor must come to the defense of the owner.

4. The owner must not interfere with the contractor's schedule.

The correct answer is: The owner must not interfere with the contractor's schedule.

An exculpatory clause is a provision in a contract that seeks to limit or eliminate liability for certain actions or outcomes. In this context, the correct answer identifies an option that does not serve the purpose of limiting liability. The phrase indicating that "the owner must not interfere with the contractor's schedule" pertains to the responsibilities and expectations set forth in the contract regarding the relationship and duties between the owner and contractor. This clause does not inherently absolve one party of liability or blame; rather, it establishes a constraint on the owner's behavior to ensure smooth project progress. In contrast, the first three options are typical examples of exculpatory clauses, as they focus on indemnity, holding harmless, or providing defense against legal claims. Each of these clauses is designed to protect one party from liability that might otherwise arise in the context of their relationship or dealings. Thus, the option that articulates an expectation of conduct by the owner regarding their interaction with the contractor does not fulfill the definition of an exculpatory clause.