On November 21, 2023, Paul Debolt and Christopher Griesedieck published, “Court allows 1 'constructive' change theory against prime contractor, dismisses another” in Westlaw Today. The following is an excerpt:
Attorneys at Venable LLP discuss the advantages and disadvantages of having a subcontract adhere to "federal common law of government contracts" following a Virginia federal court's ruling on a subcontractor's cost claims.
Government contractors often "flow down" contract clauses from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and its supplements to their subcontractors, including clauses related to changes (e.g., FAR 52.243-1) and excusable delays (e.g., FAR 52.249-14). As a result, subcontracts commonly provide that such clauses should be interpreted consistent with the "federal common law of government contracts," which generally includes decisions by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, and the Civilian and Armed Services Boards of Contract Appeals (CBCA and ASBCA).
Click here to access the article.