Federal Circuit Clarifies Prejudice Review In Bid Protest Cases
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.26.05
Explaining away seemingly contradictory precedent, the Federal Circuit in Bannum, Inc. v. U.S. (Apr. 21, 2005) clarified that, while the merits are reviewed on appeal de novo under the Administrative Procedure Act's "arbitrary and capricious or in violation of law" standard, the determination of whether a violation of law is prejudicial requires fact finding by the Court of Federal Claims and is reviewed for "clear error." Applying the clear error standard to this case, the appellate court found none in the trial court's determination that the violation had not prejudiced the protester.
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
