1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |"Should Have Known" Standard Applied to CDA Statute of Limitations

"Should Have Known" Standard Applied to CDA Statute of Limitations

Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.28.13

In what seems likely to be a major landmark in the evolving interpretation of the CDA statute of limitations, the ASBCA has held that the statute began to run in 1999, when a DCMA price analyst had all the information the government needed to recognize that it had a claim for an alleged CAS violation, even though the responsible CO may not have been aware of the claim until an audit report was issued in 2006. The ASBCA held that, in the absence of any evidence of trickery or concealment, the government "should have known" that it had a claim based on the contractor's 1999 cost proposal that appeared to be inconsistent with its disclosed accounting practice and that the government could not unilaterally extend the statute of limitations by failing to perform an audit that put the CO on actual notice that there might be a claim.


Insights

Client Alert | 7 min read | 10.22.26

Africa, MENA, and the Arbitration Act 2025: LCIA’s Latest Report

The LCIA's 2025 Annual Casework Report contains a finding that should command the attention of any business with commercial exposure to Africa or the Middle East. Participation from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) rose to almost 15% of the LCIA's caseload in 2025, and the UAE alone is now the third most represented jurisdiction globally, overtaking every non-Anglophone jurisdiction in the world.[1] That shift did not happen in isolation. It coincided with the entry into force of the Arbitration Act 2025 (the 2025 Act) — the most significant reform of English arbitration law in a generation — and a dramatic surge in parties deploying the LCIA's procedural toolkit more aggressively than ever before.[2]...