1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Happy Holidays From The Far Council -- Proposed Restrictions On Allowable Airfare

Happy Holidays From The Far Council -- Proposed Restrictions On Allowable Airfare

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.21.07

In a proposed change to FAR 31.205-46(b) (72 Fed. Reg. 72325 (Dec. 20, 2007)), the FAR Council is seeking public comments on a proposal to change the standard for allowable airfare from "the lowest customary standard, coach, or equivalent airfare offered during normal business hours" to nothing "in excess of the lowest priced coach class, or equivalent, airfare available to the contractor during normal business hours." While it appears from the comments in the proposed regulation and what is known about the background of this proposal that the principal purpose of the proposal is to measure the unallowable cost attributable to premium airfares by disallowing the excess over the lowest available discounted airfare available, the proposal obviously has the potential for creating serious difficulties for all contractors and all travel where the lowest price "available to the contractor" is determined in an ephemeral internet market that changes literally from minute to minute and depends on a variety of factors including the fliers' willingness to accept advance purchase and minimum stay requirements, restrictions on changes and refundability, and choice of carrier.

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.04.25

District Court Grants Preliminary Injunction Against Seller of Gray Market Snack Food Products

On November 12, 2025, Judge King in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington granted in part Haldiram India Ltd.’s (“Plaintiff” or “Haldiram”) motion for a preliminary injunction against Punjab Trading, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Punjab Trading”), a seller alleged to be importing and distributing gray market snack food products not authorized for sale in the United States. The court found that Haldiram was likely to succeed on the merits of its trademark infringement claim because the products at issue, which were intended for sale in India, were materially different from the versions intended for sale in the U.S., and for this reason were not genuine products when sold in the U.S. Although the court narrowed certain overbroad provisions in the requested order, it ultimately enjoined Punjab Trading from importing, selling, or assisting others in selling the non-genuine Haldiram products in the U.S. market....