The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed an $80 million ruling in favor of Skanska USA and Granite Construction against their joint-venture partner Lane Construction. The case involves a $2.3 billion highway improvement project in Florida known as the “I-4 Ultimate Project,” a public-private partnership (or “P3”) project for the Florida Department of Transportation. The court
In a recent decision, the Court of Federal Claims (COFC) ruled on bid protests filed by 12 construction companies challenging the implementation of a February 4, 2022, Executive Order 14063 that mandated the use of project labor agreements (PLAs). FAR Council implemented EO 14063 in January 2024, and it was the first executive mandate
A recent decision from the U. S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, is a MUST READ for any lawyer or construction executive involved with joint ventures (“JV’s”). This decision provides a rare, detailed look into the contentious dynamics at play when JV relationships go bad. The case also discusses how the relationships
Most government contract lawyers are already familiar with the Tucker Act (28 U.S.C. § 1491), which gives the U.S. Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction over many non-tort claims against the United States, including contract disputes, Fifth Amendment takings, tax refunds, and other matters. But another Tucker Act is often overlooked: the Little Tucker
In a recent decision, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals issued a summary judgment ruling in a case involving government claims relating to the contractor’s supply of thermal sight systems for armored vehicles. The government contended that some of the sights were defective while others were delivered late.
As to the allegedly defective
In June, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) addressed whether it had jurisdiction where a subcontractor pass-through claim was certified under the Contract Disputes Act (CDA) by the subcontractor’s president, not the prime contractor’s representative. In its motion to dismiss, the government argued that under the CDA, only the prime contractor could certify
Since our last article, fear of the coronavirus (COVID-19) continues to spread as rapidly as the disease itself. Within the last few days, President Trump declared a national emergency and announced the steps the Executive Office is taking to respond to the outbreak. The virus and the efforts taken to prevent its proliferation are
The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) continues to dominate global headlines and markets. In the U.S., COVID-19 has prompted two governors to declare states of emergency; tragically claimed the lives of multiple U.S. residents; and has been reported in 10 states and counting. Due to the growing impact of the coronavirus, commercial contractors would be wise to
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently sustained a protest that challenged the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (VA) failure to set aside an acquisition for Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (SDVOSB) or Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (VOSB). Under the Veterans Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Act of 2006 (VA Act), 38 U.S.C. §§ 8127-8128, the VA must
Technically, no. However, when the contractor is protesting the award of a contract for the same agency that issued the unfavorable Contractor Performance Evaluation Report (CPAR), the contractor may have some success arguing that there was a conflict of interest.
In a very recent decision, the Court of Federal Claims dismissed most of the claims