Hawaii Swimming Pool Licensing Law
title: "Hawaii Swimming Pool Licensing Law" description: "Complete text of Hawaii swimming pool licensing law statutes — Hawaii Code." slug: hawaii-pool-licensing-law
Hawaii Swimming Pool Licensing Law
Hawaii Code · 2 sections
The following is the full text of Hawaii’s swimming pool licensing law statutes as published in the Hawaii Code. For the official version, see the Hawaii Legislature.
Haw. Rev. Stat. § 520-1
Section
520-1 Purpose
520-2 Definitions
520-3 Duty of care of owner limited
520-4 Liability of owner limited
520-5 Exceptions to limitations
520-6 Persons using land
520-7 Rights
520-8 Rules and regulations
Cross References
Access to control invasive species, see chapter 520A.
Emergency use of private real property, see chapter 135.
Exemption for providing emergency access, shelter, and subsistence during disasters, see §663-10.7.
Recreational activity liability, see §663-1.54.
Law Journals and Reviews
The HawaiÂi Recreational Use Statute: A Practical Guide to Landowner Liability. 22 UH L. Rev. 237.
Case Notes
Hawaii recreational use statute immunized federal government from liability for negligence for injuries sustained at urban swimming pool. 945 F.2d 1134.
U.S. government immune from negligence liability under Hawaii recreational use statute (HRUS) for personal injuries suffered by plaintiff while plaintiff was using a military recreational facility, where (1) because the government did not impose a “charge” or “fee” for plaintiff to enter upon and use the recreational facility, plaintiff’s use of the government’s property was “without charge” under the statute; (2) the fact that dock on which plaintiff was injured was closed to everyone except the instructors and students of the sailing course on day of plaintiff’s injury did not strip the government of its HRUS immunity; (3) plaintiff argued that legislative history indicated that HRUS was not intended to immunize businesses from liability to their business invitees, there was no need to resort to statute’s legislative history in search of an exception that was clearly not included; and (4) although plaintiff may have had professional as well as personal reasons for taking the sailing course, plaintiff’s alleged “professional” motivation did not convert plaintiff into a “nonrecreational” user; plaintiff’s subjective intent was, in the situation, immaterial. 181 F.3d 1064.
United States’ motion for summary judgment denied, where United States had not demonstrated that Hawaii recreational use statute exempted it from negligence liability to plaintiff stemming from plaintiff’s accident on Pearl Harbor bike path while traveling to work by bicycle; plaintiff raised a material issue of fact as to whether plaintiff was a recreational user of the bike path. 180 F. Supp. 2d 1132.
Finding that rights to accreted lands could be acquired by adverse public use under implied dedication theory is inconsistent with legislative intent to encourage landowners to make their property available to public for recreational uses. 73 H. 297, 832 P.2d 724.
Plaintiffs, by averring in their affidavits that they were on landowner’s land for a commercial purpose at the time plaintiff sustained personal injury, generated a genuine issue of material fact whether they were on the land for a commercial purpose, in which case this chapter would not immunize the landowner from liability, or whether they were present for an exclusively recreational purpose, in which case this chapter would be available to landowner as a defense to plaintiff’s negligence claim. 93 H. 477, 6 P.3d 349.
This chapter was not intended to have created a universal defense available to a commercial establishment such as landowner hotel, which has opened its land to the public for commercial gain, against any and all liability for personal injury merely because there is a “recreational” component to the establishment’s operation. 93 H. 477, 6 P.3d 349.
Where plaintiff’s injury occurred in an ocean area owned by the State, this chapter did not apply to the State as it does not apply to lands owned by the government; also, where the county was not a possessor of a fee interest nor a tenant, lessee, occupant, or a person in control of Queen’s Bath, where the injury occurred, this chapter was not applicable to the county as an adjacent landowner. 110 H. 189, 130 P.3d 1054 (2006).
Trial court correctly concluded that scuba diving instructor’s status on hotel property fell as a matter of law within the ambit of this chapter as a recreational user, inasmuch as instructor was engaged in “an activity in pursuit of the use of the property for recreational purposes” and, thus, that hotel was immunized from instructor’s negligence claims under this chapter. 112 H. 472, 146 P.3d 1049 (2006).
We make every effort to comply to ADA standards, and Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act.
Visit our ADA page here. If you have any problems with any of these pages, please
contact the webmaster with the page address and problems encountered.
You may view our Privacy Policy here.
HRS §444-28
§444-28 Statute of limitations; recovery from fund. (a) No action for an arbitration award or for a judgment which may subsequently result in an order for collection from the contractors recovery fund shall be commenced later than six years from the accrual of the cause of action thereon. When any injured person commences action for an arbitration award or for a judgment which may result in collection from the contractors recovery fund, the injured person shall notify the board in writing to this effect at the time of the commencement of such action. The board shall have the right to intervene in and defend any such action. Nothing in this section shall supersede the statute of limitations as contained in section 657-8.
(b) When any injured person recovers a valid judgment in any circuit court or district court of the county where the violation occurred against any licensed contractor for such act, representation, transaction, or conduct which is in violation of the provisions of this chapter or the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto, which occurred on or after June 1, 1974, the injured person may, upon the termination of all proceedings, including reviews and appeals in connection with the judgment, file a verified claim in the court in which the judgment was entered and, upon ten days' written notice to the contractors license board, may apply to the court for an order directing payment out of the contractors recovery fund, of the amount unpaid upon the judgment, subject to the limitations stated in this section. Before proceeding against the contractors recovery fund, the injured person must first proceed against any existing bond covering the licensed contractor.
(c) The court shall proceed upon such application in a summary manner, and, upon the hearing thereof, the injured person shall be required to show:
(1) The injured person is not a spouse of debtor, or the personal representative of such spouse.
(2) The injured person has complied with all the requirements of this section.
(3) The injured person has obtained a judgment as set out in subsection (b) of this section, stating the amount thereof and the amount owing thereon at the date of the application.
(4) The injured person has made all reasonable searches and inquiries to ascertain whether the judgment debtor is possessed of real or personal property or other assets, liable to be sold or applied in satisfaction of the judgment.
(5) That by such search the injured person has discovered no personal or real property or other assets liable to be sold or applied, or that the injured person has discovered certain of them, describing them, owned by the judgment debtor and liable to be so applied, and that the injured person has taken all necessary action and proceedings for the realization thereof, and that the amount thereby realized was insufficient to satisfy the judgment, stating the amount so realized and the balance remaining due on the judgment after application of the amount realized.
(d) The court shall make an order directed to the contractors license board requiring payment from the contractors recovery fund of whatever sum it shall find to be payable upon the claim, pursuant to the provisions of and in accordance with the limitations contained in this section, if the court is satisfied, upon the hearing of the truth of all matters required to be shown by the injured person by subsection (c) of this section and that the injured person has fully pursued and exhausted all remedies available to the injured person for recovering the amount awarded by the judgment of the court.
(e) The license of the contractor shall be automatically terminated upon execution of a settlement agreement requiring payment from the contractors recovery fund or the issuance of a court order authorizing payment from the contractors recovery fund. No contractor shall be eligible to receive a new license until the contractor has repaid in full, plus interest at the rate of ten per cent a year, the amount paid from the contractors recovery fund on the contractor's account. A discharge in bankruptcy shall not relieve a person from the penalties and disabilities provided in this subsection.
(f) If, at any time, the money deposited in the contractors recovery fund is insufficient to satisfy any duly authorized claim or portion thereof, the contractors license board shall, when sufficient money has been deposited in the contractors recovery fund, satisfy such unpaid claims or portions thereof, in the order that such claims or portions thereof were originally filed.
(g) With respect to the repair or alteration of an existing residential building or structure or any appurtenance thereto, including but not limited to swimming pools, retaining walls, garages or sprinkling systems, initial construction of such appurtenances, and landscaping of private residences, including condominium or cooperative units, pursuant to a contract between the owner and a licensed contractor for which the owner has paid the contractor in full, should, because of the contractor's default, a mechanic's or materialman's lien be enforced against the property pursuant to section 507-47, the court hearing the action shall award such an owner or the owner's assigns a valid judgment against the contractor in an amount equal to the amount of the lien together with reasonable attorney's fees as determined by the court. The judgment shall include an order directing payment out of the contractors recovery fund. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section to the contrary, the owner or the owner's assigns need not meet any other requirement to secure payment from the contractors recovery fund, except that notice of the lien enforcement hearing shall be given to the contractors license board so it may appear pursuant to section 444-31. [L 1973, c 170, pt of §1; am L 1975, c 183, §1; am L 1977, c 127, §3; gen ch 1985; am L 1992, c 258, §§5, 6]
Case Notes
Building material supplier could recover from fund where action against contractor began prior to 1977 amendments. 63 H. 540, 632 P.2d 649 (1981).
References
The law belongs to the people. Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 590 U.S. (2020)