Implied Terms in Government Contracts Analyzed
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 07.17.15
The recent edition of the Public Contract Law Journal (Winter 2015) features an article by C&M's Stanfield Johnson entitled, "Hercules, Winstar, and the Supreme Court's Conspicuous and Potentially Consequential Error." The June 2015 issue of the Nash & Cibinic Report (at 34) provides a brief review and recommends that "all lawyers in the field of Government procurement should read" this article on "the role of implied terms" in government contracts.
Contacts
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
