Government Liable for $99 Million in Breach of Contract Damages Under Indemnification Clause
Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.24.18
On July 18, 2018, the Federal Circuit affirmed the U.S. Court of Federal Claims’ decision in Shell Oil Co., et al. awarding $99.5M to Shell and other oil companies for the government’s breach of World War II-era contracts for high-octane aviation gasoline production (previously discussed here, and here).
The case began when the U.S. and California sued the oil companies under CERCLA for costs of cleaning up acid sludge caused by the gasoline production. After being found liable under CERCLA, the companies filed claims against the government at the COFC for reimbursement of their CERCLA costs under the theory that the government had breached the “Taxes” clauses in their contracts, which, they argued, required the government to pay “any” charges related to gasoline production. In a decision which may encourage other contractors to pursue recovery under similar contract provisions such as “hold harmless” clauses in facilities contracts, and indemnification clauses authorized under Public Law 85-804, the Federal Circuit ruled that the COFC properly determined that the government breached the Taxes clause, and affirmed the award of $99.5M in damages (including nearly $31 million in interest on the companies’ claims).
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.15.26
GAO Indicates Reasonable Conflict of Interest Investigation Must Include Inquiry of Involved Firm
The U.S. Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) recent decision in Viderity Inc.—Costs, B-424422.5, Sept. 1, 2026, offers useful insight into what constitutes a legally sufficient conflict of interest investigation. The decision arose in an unusual procedural posture: Viderity initially protested, alleging that an agency evaluator had a personal conflict of interest. After the agency took corrective action, Viderity filed a cost entitlement claim requesting that GAO direct the agency to reimburse Viderity’s protest costs. In evaluating that claim, GAO assessed whether Viderity’s underlying protest ground was “clearly meritorious.”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 09.15.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 09.14.26
AI in Life Sciences: Ten Legal Considerations and Risks of AI Use in Drug Discovery and Development
Client Alert | 6 min read | 09.14.26
Mental Health Parity Bulletin Restates Best Practices for Evaluating Compliance






