Mandatory Suspension/Debarment Review For "Poorly Performing" Contractors
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.23.10
In another sign that the government is increasing its focus on suspension and debarment, a February 2010 Department of Homeland Security IG report found that DHS has been reluctant to apply existing procedures against poorly performing contractors and recommended that DHS develop policies to determine whether to refer them to the suspension and debarment official when their contracts have been terminated for default or are being considered for default. DHS management concurred with the recommendation and will now require that contracting officers provide any determination of nonresponsibility to the S/D official when the determination is based in whole or part on the contractor's (1) lack of satisfactory performance record under DHS contracts; (2) lack of satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics; or (3) inability to qualify or ineligibility under applicable laws and regulations.
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.13.26
Supreme Court Confirms Contractual Loss of Bargain Without Repudiatory Breach
English law has long treated the choice between terminating for repudiatory breach and exercising a contractual termination right as consequential. Under the Financings[1] causation principle, a party exercising a contractual right for a non-repudiatory breach could recover losses accrued to the date of termination — but nothing more. Loss of bargain was out of reach unless the breach went to the root of the contract. A practical workaround, confirmed in Lombard,[2] was to designate the relevant obligation as a condition, elevating any breach to repudiatory status, but that device carries significant strategic risk if the termination is later found to have been wrongful.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.12.26
Developments in Canadian Investment Treaty Practice: New FIPA Between Canada and UAE in Force
Client Alert | 6 min read | 08.11.26
Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.10.26
