Contracting Authority Analyzed In 3 Cases
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 06.16.06
In a spate of recent decisions by different Court of Federal Claims judges, the proper scope of contracting authority is closely analyzed. In Brunner v. U.S. (May 2, 2001), Judge Wolski provides a treatise that concludes that apparent authority, contrary to all reports, is alive and well in government contracts and is only limited by publicly available laws and regulations that restrict the government agent's power to contract; in Arakaki v. U.S. (May 30, 2006), Judge Hewitt disagrees; and in Telenor Satellite Servs., Inc. v. U.S. (June 2, 2006), handled by C&M, Judge Baskir discusses both implied authority and ratification when finding both for a bailment agreement.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 02.05.26
EU–Brazil Mutual Adequacy: A Milestone for Global Data Flows and Latin America’s Digital Positioning
On January 27, the EU and Brazil announced their positive determination on the mutual adequacy of Brazil’s and the EU’s data privacy frameworks — confirming the growing importance of transatlantic data transfers and the EU-Mercosur relationship. This adequacy decision, while not formally tied to the EU-Mercosur trade negotiations, is a historic development that can facilitate cross-border data transfers and fuel shared economic growth driven by data-centered service sectors.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 02.04.26
DOJ Antitrust Division Issues First-Ever Award Under Whistleblower Rewards Program
Client Alert | 4 min read | 02.04.26
New York District Court Confirms Insurance Coverage Must Mean Something
Client Alert | 13 min read | 02.04.26
