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:
- Federal law on termination for convenience was not binding on the Commonwealth;
- General principles of contract interpretation under State law applied;
- The termination language was unambiguous and broad; and
- 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.
Linking Obligations
If you want to bind the subcontractor to the prime in every way the same as the prime is bound to the owner, then the incorporation clause of the subcontract should be: . . .
Termination of Government Contracts for Convenience (T4C)
Imagine you’re a Government Contractor under a firm, fixed-price contract and you’ve done nothing wrong. Nevertheless, the Government has decided to unilaterally end its contract with you. Yes, the Government can do this...
Government Contractors: Build a Snowman in August
As a Government Contractor, when have you agreed to perform a certain way, but later realized that another way is better for everybody? When the Government agrees, expressly or impliedly, to the alternative performance, it waives a credit for the unperformed work.
Construction Dispute Settlement: Dealing with Details
Reap the benefits of settling a construction dispute by doing these things.
E-mail Signature Not Enough to Certify a Claim
Construction project professionals routinely send e-mails with “signatures,” which typically include the sender’s typewritten name, title, contact information, and/or company logo. But, this sort of e-mail “signature” is not enough to certify a claim to the Government.
Government Contractors: Ask for a “Sum Certain” in Your Claim
If your Claim includes an item for damages with an amount “TBD,” you could lose the entire Claim.
Contractors: Be Aware When Contracting with Virginia Public Agencies
Without a valid contract, a Virginia public entity has no duty to to pay for any of your work.
Constructive Acceleration
Contractors know that time is money. So, the point is clear when expressly told to “Speed Up! Go Faster!”
But, what do you […]
Construction Contracts & Whodunit
Imagine reading a crime novel and just when you think you figured out whodunit, a plot twist suggests a different culprit. In construction contracting, finding the right answer can be a difficult task when
