When Massachusetts’ highest State court rejected Federal law on termination for convenience (T4C) a public entity’s “sole discretion . . . for any reason” ended a supplier’s contract.  Is this too much governmental power or good stewardship of public resources?

Under a public contract, a Supplier agreed to provide fuel to the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority.  About eleven months into the two-year contract, the Authority terminated the contract because it could get the same fuel for a cheaper price from a different supplier.

Upon 30-days written notice, termination by the Authority was within its “sole discretion . . . for any reason.”  The terminated party was expressly entitled to payment for: demobilization, contract closeout, and costs of and profit on work performed.

The Massachusetts State Supreme Judicial Court held the termination was proper and made several points:

  1. Federal law on termination for convenience was not binding on the Commonwealth;
  2. General principles of contract interpretation under State law applied;
  3. The termination language was unambiguous and broad; and
  4. The requirement for pre-termination written notice was enough consideration for a contract.

The Court expressly stated it was not deciding whether a T4C would be proper to rebid the contract in search of a lower price.  But, the roadmap of this decision would make it easy for a Court to find even such a T4C was OK.

A. L. Prime Energy Consultant, Inc. v. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, 479 Mass. 419 (May 2, 2018).

Published On: November 27, 2018

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

Owner Nonpayment is No Defense to Miller Act Claim

October 24, 2017|

As if you needed confirmation that the Federal Miller Act is a powerful tool for unpaid subcontractors, this is it.  Even when a Prime ordered and accepted the Sub’s work, but didn’t have to pay under the Subcontract, the Subcontractor still. . . .

Trust, but Verify

October 17, 2017|

Rely at your own risk upon a Contracting Officer’s statements when statutes or contract provisions may conflict.

Bases Covered?

August 8, 2017|

Contractors, will your current insurance policy cover “your work” as a joint venture partner? The typical answer is NO. 

Rules, Which Rules?

July 25, 2017|

Good Idea: Include a choice of law clause in your contract to promote consistency and predictability (while reducing potential costs and risk).

Government Liability for Third-Party Delays

July 18, 2017|

Generally, the Government is not responsible for delays caused by third parties, even other contractors at its own project site, unless the Government affirmatively indicates the site will be ready and available. 

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

Jonathan J. Straw
Best Lawyers® - Jonathan Straw | 2026

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!