The U.S. Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals' recent decision in HD Inc., ASBCA 63794, demonstrates the importance of following the terms of a solicitation when submitting a proposal on federal projects, particularly as...more
Government contractors working for the Department of Education (DE), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and other agencies like the National Science Foundation (NSF) and Consumer Financial...more
On December 20, 2023, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (the Board) denied the government’s motion to dismiss pandemic-related claims. In doing so, the Board rejected the government’s arguments alleging that the...more
Federal contractors are winning a safeguard against the government’s practice of moving to dismiss cases brought under the Contract Disputes Act (CDA) for lack of jurisdiction in the late stages of litigation. Recent...more
WHAT: After previewing earlier this year that it was reconsidering its existing precedent, the Federal Circuit held yesterday that the requirement that contractors state a “sum certain” in claims brought under the Contract...more
One of the most common concerns for federal contractors is delay. Projects can fall behind schedule for a variety of reasons that are outside of the contractor’s control (government-directed changes, differing site...more
Welcome back to our “Lifecycle of a Claim” series. This series explores the Contract Disputes Act claims process, with practical guidance stemming from recent case law every step of the way. Click the subscribe button on this...more
The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (“ASBCA”) recently denied a contractor’s claim for additional compensation as the contractor failed to establish its work was constructively suspended or that its contract was...more
Forty-five years after enactment of the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (CDA), contractors and agencies still often struggle to identify what is and isn’t a CDA claim—a term the CDA itself does not define. Until the CDA’s...more
Welcome back to our “Lifecycle of a Claim” series. This series explores the Contract Disputes Act (“CDA”) claims process, with practical guidance stemming from recent case law every step of the way. ...more
In its recent decision in T.H.R. Enterprises, Inc., the Court of Federal Claims reminds contractors to read claim release language carefully before executing any agreement or modification. T.H.R. Enterprises, Inc. involved an...more
Last month, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals held that a public contractor could not recover $100k in construction costs incurred following the government’s decision to close down a base in Tennessee due to...more
The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in ECC International Constructors, LLC (ASBCA No. 59643 November 9, 2021) issued a partial summary judgment order dismissing several of the contractor's claims for lack of a sum...more
The Contract Disputes Act allows contractors seeking payment of a claim arising from a contract with the federal government six years from the date it accrued to submit the claim to the contracting officer. Failure to do so...more
The Contract Disputes Act establishes the formal process for resolving nearly all claims and disputes that arise under federal government contracts. It is the source of the requirement that contractors certify claims in...more
In Harry Pepper and Associates, Inc., the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals addressed three exceptions to the strict enforcement of claim notice requirements in the context of a Government motion for summary judgment...more
In the recent case of Granite Construction Co., ASBCA 62281, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals granted partial summary judgment to a contractor that sought delay damages under FAR 52.242-14, Suspension of...more
The Government has many rules regarding the protection of data. Government contractors must understand these rules and the importance of timely and properly marking data that they own or develop in performance of a government...more
The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (the “Board”) recently held the government liable for design delays where the government prematurely required details in design submissions and failed to provide comments on design...more
In a departure from its prior precedent, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) recently held in Kamaludin Slyman CSC, ASBCA Nos. 62006, 62007, 62008, that a typed name at the end of an email satisfies the...more
Government contractors operate in a constantly changing regulatory environment, and in certain circumstances, a contractor may be contractually entitled to receive a price adjustment when it must comply with a new federal law...more
Despite “troubling” government conduct, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) recently denied an appeal arising out of electrical work performed on a $38 million construction project involving the ground-up...more
In Hejran Hejrat Co. LTD, v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, No. 2018-2206, 2019 WL 3210172 (Fed. Cir. July 17, 2019), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed an Armed Services Board of...more
In Watts Constructors, LLC, (June 24, 2019), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) provided further guidance on its earlier decision ECC CENTCOM, 18-1 BCA 37,133. ...more
Part 42.15 of the FAR entitles federal contractors to submit comments and receive agency review of an unfavorable performance evaluation in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). If the contractor’s...more