Novation Trap For The Unwary
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.04.11
In Raytheon Co. v. U.S. (Jan. 26, 2011), the Court of Federal Claims held that a contractor's claim for the pension cost adjustment due under CAS 413 for pension plans with funding deficits at the time of a "segment closing" could be barred by the standard language required in novation agreements providing that the contractor "waives any claims and rights against the Government that it now has or may have in the future in connection with the [novated] contracts." Because the Government takes the position that its agreement to novate contracts is completely within the untrammeled discretion of the Government, the Government could effectively negate the requirements of CAS 413 if this decision is correct by refusing to novate contracts unless the contractor agrees to waive its rights to an adjustment under CAS 413.
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 10.30.26
Recent sustain decisions by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in Fluor Federal Solutions, LLC and Reliance Test & Technology send a clear message: when an agency tries to fix a Procurement Integrity Act (PIA) violation by committing a second one, the cure can be just as fatal as the disease. The cases involved the U.S. Air Force’s $1.8 billion procurement for O&M services at Elgin Air Force Base. During discussions, the Air Force inadvertently released a pricing overview slide with all offerors’ bottom-line evaluated costs to Reliance Test & Technology, which immediately notified the agency of the error. In response, the Air Force decided to level the playing field by providing the same information to all the other offerors in the procurement, stating, “[o]fferors may consider this disclosure in their [final proposal revision].”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.29.26
What University Licensors Should Learn From TexasLDPC v. Broadcom
Client Alert | 2 min read | 10.28.26
Debriefing to Dead Briefing: How to Avoid Dismissal by Identifying “Required” Debriefings
