Better Roads

July 2014

Better Roads Digital Magazine

Issue link: https://read.dmtmag.com/i/348335

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 22 of 31

Better Roads July 2014 21 7H[W,1)2WRRUYLVLWZZZEHWWHUURDGVFRPLQIR 7H[W,1)2WRRUYLVLWZZZEHWWHUURDGVFRPLQIR On July 22, 2013, Hanover and Lodge filed separate lawsuits against the Corps in the Court of Federal Claims. They both argued the Corps' termination for default was wrongful, and as a result, they should be entitled to the $23,995,183.86 owed to the Corps under the Tender and Release Agreement. The two lawsuits were consolidated. The Government moved to dismiss the consolidated lawsuit, arguing the court lacked jurisdiction because Hanover's and Lodge's claims for $24 million, based on an alleged improper termination for default, were never submitted to the CO and were not the subject of a final decision. Hanover and Lodge responded that the court had proper jurisdiction because their claims were effectively part of the CO's termination for default and execution of the Tender and Release Agreement. They further argued it would have been futile to submit a claim for money damages to the CO based on an alleged improper termination because there was little (to no) chance the decision would be reversed. The court disagreed with Hanover and Lodge. The court found the CDA requires contractors to submit claims to the CO and obtain a final decision before proceeding to court. In fact, the failure to obtain a final decision – regardless of how futile it might appear – results in the court's lack of jurisdiction to even hear a contractor's appeal. As a result, the court dismissed the consolidated lawsuit based on lack of jurisdiction. The Hanover matter emphasizes the importance of mak- ing a claim for any and all relief being sought to the Contracting Officer. A final decision by the Contracting Officer is a prerequisite to appealing to the next level. Without a final decision, a contractor (and its surety) can be foreclosed from pursuing any claimed damages. In Hanover, the contractor's failure to obtain a final deci- sion relating to the termination for default resulted in the court's dismissal of its claim for $24 million. Email: info@mobilebarriers.com www.mobilebarriers.com ®

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Better Roads - July 2014