1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |One-Sided Discussions with the Awardee—the Solution, Not the Problem

One-Sided Discussions with the Awardee—the Solution, Not the Problem

Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.18.16

Last month in Caddell Construction v. U.S., the Court of Federal Claims declared the State Department's award of a contract for construction of a new embassy compound in Mozambique null and void and ordered the agency to reopen discussions with only the awardee and to reevaluate the offerors' pricing. In the redacted opinion released on February 10, the Court explained that the unusual remedy of one-sided discussions was appropriate because the agency misled the awardee during discussions into lowering its price when it was already the only price below the Independent Government Estimate and because the awardee would be prejudiced if all offerors were allowed to revise their proposals, given that the misleading discussions affected only the awardee and the award price and IGE had already been publicly disclosed.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.25.26

DOJ Signals Increased Antitrust Scrutiny of Algorithmic Pricing in Willow Bridge Decision

Algorithmic pricing tools commonly used by businesses to increase efficiency and profits are under increasing antitrust scrutiny. This summer, federal regulators, state attorneys general, and state legislatures grappled with competing businesses providing nonpublic, competitively sensitive data to common algorithmic platforms. The Third Circuit deepened an emerging circuit split with the Ninth Circuit on algorithmic pricing liability, reviving antitrust claims against Atlantic City casino-hotels in a decision with direct implications for any company that uses a common pricing platform. See Crowell’s recent client alert. And New Jersey enacted two landmark laws—the FAIR Act and the Fair Price Protection Act—directly regulating algorithmic rent-setting and surveillance pricing. See Crowell’s recent client alert....

View All Insights