Review of Finality Clauses in Government Contracts: Hearings Before Subcommittee No. 1 of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Eighty-third Congress, First and Second Sessions, on H.R. 1839 and S. 24, a Bill and an Act to Permit Review of Decisions of Government Contracting Officers Involving Questions of Fact Arising Under Government Contracts in Cases Other Than Those in which Fraud is Alleged, and for Other Purposes : H.R. 3634, a Bill to Amend Title 28 of the United States Code So as to Provide for a Limited Judicial Review of Decisions of Federal Officers Under "finality Clauses" in Government Contracts : H.R. 6946, a Bill to Permit Review of Decisions of Government Contracting Officers Involving Questions of Fact Arising Under Government Contracts in Cases Other Than Those in which Fraud is Alleged, and for Other Purposes. July 30, 1953, January 21 and 22, 1954
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1954 - 145 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
Accounting Office action administrative agencies alleged amended American appeal apply arbitrary arising association authority believe bill capricious Chairman committee Company Comptroller concerned CONGRESS THE LIBRARY consideration construction contained contracting officer contractor correct Court of Claims decided Department Department of Defense determination disputes clause effect enactment entered existing favor Federal feel final follows fraud fraudulent further give Government contracts GRAHAM grossly erroneous hearings House imply bad faith industry interested involving judicial review Judiciary jurisdiction Justice language legislation letter limited matter mean ment objection opinion parties passed permit Phillips position possible present procedure proposed proved provision questions of fact questions of law reason referred representative respect result revised rule Senate Services situation specifications standard statement substantial evidence supported Supreme Court tion United unless WALTER Washington Willis Wunderlich decision
Page 97 - Except as otherwise provided in this contract, any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under this contract which is not disposed of by agreement shall be decided by the Contracting Officer, who shall reduce his decision to writing and mail or otherwise furnish a copy thereof to the Contractor.
Page 101 - The decision of the Secretary or his duly authorized representative for the determination of such appeals shall be final and conclusive unless determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to have been fraudulent, or capricious, or arbitrary, or so grossly erroneous as necessarily to imply bad faith, or not supported by substantial evidence.
Page 134 - ... provided, however, that any such decision shall be final and conclusive unless the same is fraudulent or capricious or arbitrary or so grossly erroneous as necessarily to imply bad faith, or is not supported by substantial evidence. "Sec. 2. No Government contract shall contain a provision making final on a question of law the decision of any administrative official, representative, or board.
Page 38 - All claims and demands whatever by the Government of the United States or against it, and all accounts whatever in which the Government of the United States is concerned, either as debtor or creditor, shall be settled and adjusted in the General Accounting Office.
Page 39 - Despite the fact that other words such as 'negligence,' 'incompetence,' 'capriciousness,' and 'arbitrary' have been used in the course of the opinions, this Court has consistently upheld the finality of the department head's decision unless it was founded on fraud, alleged and proved. So fraud is in essence the exception. By fraud we mean conscious wrongdoing, an intention to cheat or be dishonest.
Page 1 - That no provision of any contract entered into by the United States, relating to the finality or conclusiveness of any decision of the head of any department or agency or his duly authorized representative or board in a dispute involving a question arising under such contract, shall be pleaded in any suit now filed or to be filed as limiting judicial review of any such decision to cases where fraud by such official...
Page 84 - But the rule we announce has wide application and a devastating effect. It makes a tyrant out of every contracting officer. He is granted the power of a tyrant even though he is stubborn, perverse, or captious. He is allowed the power of a tyrant though he is incompetent or negligent. He has the power of life and death over a private business even though his decision is grossly erroneous. Power granted is seldom neglected.
Page 136 - Except as otherwise specifically provided In this contract, all disputes concerning questions of fact arising under this contract shall be decided by the contracting officer subject to written appeal by the contractor within 30 days to the head of the department concerned or his duly authorized representative, whose decision shall be final and conclusive upon the parties thereto. In the meantime the contractor shall diligently proceed with the work as directed.
Page 97 - Secretary, and the decision of the Secretary or his duly authorized representative for the hearing of such appeals shall, unless determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to have been fraudulent, or capricious, or arbitrary or so grossly erroneous as necessarily to imply bad faith, or not supported by substantial evidence...