Requirements may exist outside the four corners of the contract when such requirements are: (1) otherwise mandatory and (2) express a significant or deeply ingrained strand of public procurement policy. In other words, your contract may include requirements not shown or otherwise indicated in the contract documents.
In an example of this, a Contractor agreed to provide pre-engineered metal buildings for the Army’s use at Camp Edwards, Massachusetts. Under the Miller Act and the FAR, bonds for construction projects are mandatory. The mandate for payment bonds is based upon the “deeply ingrained strand of public procurement policy” that security should be provided for entities or persons furnishing labor and materials in the performance of government contracts. The mandate for performance bonds is due to the Government’s need for security to ensure the use of public funds results in a finished product since not completing a public project could be a waste or misuse of public funds. Of course, (dripping with sarcasm) we’ve never seen a public entity waste or misuse public funds, right.
The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals held bonds were part of the contract even though bonding requirements were not expressly stated nor incorporated by reference. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed with the Board. K-Con, Inc. v. Secretary of the Army, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Case No.: 2017-2254 (Nov. 5, 2018).
Next time you review an RFP, carefully consider what you don’t see but that may still be required.
Read another short example here: Adding Terms to a Government Contract without Saying So.
Roads & Bridges | Maximizing Damage Recovery
MAXIMIZING DAMAGE RECOVERY
Tracking Costs, Avoiding Duplication in Liquidated and Actual Damage Claims
A County and Contractor contracted for construction of a road and […]
Roads & Bridges | Roadwork, Delays and Disputes
ROADWORK, DELAYS, AND DISPUTES
The Subcontract Case In Pecos County, Texas
“Road construction is ubiquitous in our society. . . .” C&C Road […]
Roads & Bridges | Understanding Sovereign Immunity
UNDERSTANDING SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY| Public Contracts and Lessons from Recent Texas Cases
Generally, governmental entities are immune from lawsuits. One exception is contractual. If […]
Roads & Bridges | Indiana Court Upholds Broad ND4D Clause
INDIANA COURT UPHOLDS BROAD ND4D CLAUSE | Ruling Precludes Subcontractor Claims for Delay and Acceleration Damages
This is the story of an Indiana […]
Roads & Bridges | Some Conditions Apply
SOME CONDITIONS APPLY | The scope of insurance policy coverage and what the terms dictate
At some time or another, many have tried […]
Roads & Bridges | Contract Termination
CONTRACT TERMINATION | An unpredictable case teaches hard lessons to each party involved
Court decisions are “opinions.” There are majority and dissenting (disagreeing) […]
Roads & Bridges | Good Faith and Fair Dealing
GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING | How Do You Prove a Party Has Failed to Act Based Upon an Ulterior Motive?
The duty […]
Roads & Bridges | Not Another Notice Story
NOT ANOTHER NOTICE STORY| This Defensive Argument Seems to be on the Rise
AS I CONSIDERED the subject matter for this column, I […]
Roads & Bridges | All According to Plan
ALL ACCORDING TO PLAN | Exact Measurements Go a Long Way
In December 2013, a contractor agreed to replace four bridges for the […]









