Termination Clause Trumps Cost-Sharing
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 01.30.06
The Federal Circuit in Jacobs Eng'g Group, Inc. v. U.S. (Jan. 19, 2006) had before it the interesting scenario of the government terminating a contract with an 80/20 cost share and the contractor insisting that it should get "all" its costs under the termination for convenience clause, not just 80% per the cost share. The court agreed, because the cost share had not been specifically incorporated in the termination clause and the termination had deprived the contractor of his compensating benefit for taking the cost share in the first place, patent rights in the finished work.
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 04.15.24
Making the EU Courts More Efficient for Trade-Related Decisions
On March 19, 2024, the European Council adopted changes to the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union in an attempt to improve its efficiency.
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.15.24
New FAR Part 40 to Address Supply Chain and Information Security Requirements
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.11.24
U.S. Chamber Submits Comments on the FAR Council’s Proposed Rule Regarding Pay Transparency
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.10.24
