Finality Clauses in Government Contracts: Hearings, Eighty-second Congress, Second Session, on S. 2487. February 15, 20 and March 21, 1952
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1952 - 137 pages
Considers (82) S. 2487.
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 American appeal arbitrary arising article 15 association attorney authority bad faith believe bill Board capricious Chairman committee complete Comptroller concerned conclusive Congress construction contain contracting officer contractor counsel course Court of Claims decided decision Defense department head determination disputes clause effect enacted Engineers entered established evidence existing fair Federal final findings follows fraud further give Government contracts grossly erroneous head hearing imply interest involved Johnson judgment judicial review Judiciary jurisdiction Justice language legislation limited majority matter McCARRAN mean ment opinion parties permit Phillips present procedure proposed proved provision questions of fact reasonable record referred relief remedy representative respect result rule Senator HENDRICKSON Senator KILGORE Services specifications standard statement substantial suggested supported Supreme Court Thank United unless Washington Wunderlich Yates
Page 89 - Government may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or otherwise, and may take possession of and utilize in completing the work such materials, appliances, and plant as may be on the site of the work and necessary therefor.
Page 80 - 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 65 - Disputes. — Except as otherwise specifically provided in this contract, all disputes concerning questions of fact arising under this contract...
Page 27 - When the United States, with constitutional authority, makes contracts, it has rights and incurs responsibilities similar to those of individuals who are parties to such instruments. There is no difference, said the Court in United States v. Bank of Metropolis, 15 Pet. 377, 392, except that the United States cannot be sued without its consent.
Page 65 - Article 15 have been approved and enforced 'in the absence of fraud or such gross mistake as would necessarily imply bad faith, or a failure to exercise an honest judgment.
Page 14 - 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 6 - Nor could I have believed it. Granted that these contracts are legal, it should not follow that one who takes a public contract puts himself wholly in the power of contracting officers and department heads. When we recently repeated in Moorman that their decisions were " 'conclusive, unless impeached on the ground of fraud, or such gross mistake as necessarily implied bad faith' ", id., 338 US at page 461, 70 S.
Page 89 - If the Government does not terminate the right of the contractor to proceed, the contractor shall continue the work, in which event the actual damages for the delay will be impossible to determine and in lieu thereof the contractor shall pay to the Government as fixed, agreed, and liquidated damages for each calendar day of delay until the work is completed or accepted the amount as set forth in the specifications...