The Board (and the government) should not elevate form over substance in evaluating the sufficiency of a contractor’s notice.
The law is not a trend-setter. It doesn’t readily change or adapt to tech. So, a commonplace practice in business became a dispute when a claimant digitally certified a claim under the Contract Disputes Act.
Despite “abhorrent” behavior by the Army Corps of Engineers, a […]
- Government Construction Contracts Require Bonds, Even When Contract Doesn’t Say So GalleryAmbiguity, Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA), Contract Interpretation, Court of Federal Claims, Government Contract, Terms and Conditions
Yesterday (Nov. 5, 2018), the Fed. Cir. Ct. of Appeals again endorsed the Christian doctrine, which can make unstated requirements part of a government contract.
Contractors take heed – a time extension may be issued […]
Contract formation confirms the parties understand and agree to all […]
When you know a current action or inaction is wrong, but you do not object, should you be allowed to object later?
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.