Remember the adage, “what you say today could bite you tomorrow.”
Recently, a Contractor won its argument before the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) because the other party to the contract (the U.S. Army) prevented its own defense by insisting upon its own words and later trying to escape them.
Under a contract with the U.S. Army, Appellant/Contractor agreed to provide role-playing, human actors to help train soldiers to deal with civilians on a battlefield. Before the Army had issued the third of at least six task orders, the Contractor submitted a Request for Equitable Adjustment under Task Order No. 2.
In settling the Contractor’s Request for Equitable Adjustment, the Army drafted the language of a Contract Modification (Mod) stating “there are no further requests for equitable adjustments or claims to be submitted under this contract.” The Mod language was not limited to claims or requests by the Contractor. As such, the language included claims or requests by the Contractor AND the Army. This was the linchpin. Later, the Army lost its claim against the Contractor for damages related to Task Order No. 2 as the very language drafted by the Army in Mod 4 prevented the Army’s later claim.
Appeal of Supply & Service Team GmbH, ASBCA No. 59630, decided March 1, 2017.
Roads & Bridges | Award Upheld in W. Va. Caisson Dispute
AWARD UPHELD IN W.VA. CAISSON DISPUTE
Federal court reinforces high bar for overturning arbitration
In 2018, the West Virginia Department of Highways (DOH) awarded […]
Roads & Bridges |Let the Contract Lead
LET THE CONTRACT LEAD
Documents offer guidance needed to manage risk without derailing projects
Construction is an industry of managed risk. Whether the prices […]
Roads & Bridges | When is an Invoice Really an Invoice?
WHEN IS AN INVOICE REALLY AN INVOICE?
All court decisions are opinions. Appellate court decisions are typically made by a panel of three […]
Roads & Bridges | Clarifying Punitive Damages
CLARIFYING PUNITIVE DAMAGES
In June 2021, the South Dakota Department of Transportation contracted for the demolition and construction of a bridge on State […]
Roads & Bridges | When Approximate Means Assumed Risk
WHEN APPROXIMATE MEANS ASSUMED RISK
A New York Court Shows How Performance Specifications Can Leave Contractors Holding the Bag
Sometimes when we are told […]
Roads & Bridges | From Roman Arches to AI
FROM ROMAN ARCHES TO AI
Can Construction Evolve Without Risk?
The construction industry blends old with new. From ancient Roman archways and aqueducts and […]
Roads & Bridges | Caught in the Middle
CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE
New Mexico bridge case highlights the importance of written agreements for changes and delay compensation
In construction contracting, hope for […]
Roads & Bridges | Wait and It’s Waived
WAIT AND IT’S WAIVED
Roads & Bridges | Supreme Court Ruling on Arbitration Delay
Don’t wait to arbitrate! Progressing too far down the litigation […]
Roads & Bridges | Court Defines When Contractors Can Withdraw Due to Mistakes
BIDDING BLUNDER
Roads & Bridges | Court Defines When Contractors Can Withdraw Due to Mistakes
For over 125 years, the vast majority of jurisdictions […]
