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 | 6 min read | 11.25.25
Brussels Court Clarifies the EU’s SPC Manufacturing Waiver Regulation Rules
On November 13, 2025, the president of the French-speaking Brussels Enterprise Court ruled in the long-running battle between Sandoz and Regeneron about the correct interpretation of the EU’s Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC) Manufacturing Waiver Regulation regarding exports to a non-EU market. The Brussels Court dismissed Regeneron’s claim that Sandoz had provided a defective notification and agreed with Sandoz’s interpretation of the Regulation.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.24.25
Client Alert | 7 min read | 11.24.25
Draft Executive Order Seeks to Short-Circuit AI State Regulation
Client Alert | 5 min read | 11.24.25
Qatar Enacts Law No. (22) of 2025 on Persons with Disabilities
