FAR excusable delays in construction federal contracting relates to an unforeseeable delay and those that go beyond the contractor’s control. On the other hand a contract delay that is considered non- excusable is in fact foreseeable. The difference drives whether the contractor or the government must bear the risk. Other… Read more »
When arguing or negotiating construction defect claims for defective specifications in federal government contract claims, companies must show that such defective specifications are not suitable for producing the required result. These are very fact specific situations that must be first introduced at the Agency level. Contractors often make the costly mistake of introducing new… Read more »
When the federal government awards a contract, the Termination for Default Clause acts to the agency’s advantage in the end.When contractors attempt the appeal the agency’s contract termination for cause action, there are specific rules you must be aware of. One of them is paying damages to the government for… Read more »
When filing claims against the government, under the theory of equitable subrogation, there are some tricky rules of law in place. For example, in a recent Court of Federal Claims case, Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, et al. v. United States, No. 14-84 C (Nov. 19, 2014), the court ruled that under… Read more »
Contractors can claim mistake of fact in bid claims against the federal government. When arguing that there was a mistake in bid, a contractor can either raise a mutual mistake of fact (both contractor and government made a mistake in drafting the agreement) or unilateral mistake of fact (contractor mistake)… Read more »
Many contractors often ask what is a latent defect (patent vs latent)? Knowing the answer is essential to your decision on whether or not to litigate the dispute. A patent defect and latent defect situation on government contracts can severely impact the cost of performance both for the agency and… Read more »