Board Rejects Claim Based on Certain Fiscal Law Violations
Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.12.17
In Parsons Government Services, Inc. (ASBCA No. 60663, May 3, 2017), the Board dismissed Parsons’ $21 million claim because both contractual allegations turned on fiscal law provisions that did not entitle Parsons to relief. First, Parsons argued that the contract was void ab initio, entitling Parsons to quantum meruit, because “the government should have awarded the contract as a construction contract appropriating MILCON funds [pursuant to 10 U.S.C. §§ 2801 et seq.] instead of a supply and services contract using O&M funds.” Second, Parsons argued that the government “violated the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing by depriving Parsons of its reasonable expectations” of the necessary Congressional oversight and more stringent terms consistent with a MILCON-funded contract….” The Board rejected both arguments under Federal Circuit precedent, finding that the statutory MILCON provision underlying Parsons’ claim did not provide a private right of action for contractors to sue because the primary intended beneficiary of the statute was the government.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 10 min read | 03.19.26
[1] In a recent development, the UK Supreme Court ruled that Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) are not excluded from patentability due to being a computer program “as such.” In doing so, the Court set out the framework of a new test for the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to use when evaluating the patentability of computer. The ruling breaks down barriers to the patenting of AI algorithms in the UK and paves the way for a wider change in the UK IPO’s approach to assessing excluded subject matter.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 03.19.26
Client Alert | 6 min read | 03.18.26
CFTC Takes Additional Steps Toward Prediction Market Regulation: What You Need to Know
Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.18.26


