Finality Clauses in Government Contracts: Hearings, Eighty-second Congress, Second Session, on S. 2487. February 15, 20 and March 21, 1952Considers (82) S. 2487. |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 22
Page 7
... supported by substantial evidence . " Sincerely yours , LINDSAY C. WARREN , Comptroller General of the United States . Mr. YATES . The Budget and Accounting Act , 1921 ( 42 Stat . 24 ) , and the Budget Accounting Procedures Act of 1950 ...
... supported by substantial evidence . " Sincerely yours , LINDSAY C. WARREN , Comptroller General of the United States . Mr. YATES . The Budget and Accounting Act , 1921 ( 42 Stat . 24 ) , and the Budget Accounting Procedures Act of 1950 ...
Page 10
... supported by the facts . S. 2487 , as introduced , is considered by the General Accounting Office as inadequate and is objectionable because no provision is made therein for a review of decisions of administrative officers by the ...
... supported by the facts . S. 2487 , as introduced , is considered by the General Accounting Office as inadequate and is objectionable because no provision is made therein for a review of decisions of administrative officers by the ...
Page 11
... supported by substantial evidence , there would be restored to the courts and to the General Accounting Office , the normal present jurisdiction , or their normal and proper jurisdiction . Thank you . Senator HENDRICKSON . I see your ...
... supported by substantial evidence , there would be restored to the courts and to the General Accounting Office , the normal present jurisdiction , or their normal and proper jurisdiction . Thank you . Senator HENDRICKSON . I see your ...
Page 29
... supported by the evidence upon which such decision was based . Limiting the right of judicial review to decisions where the evidence shows that the contracting officer acted arbitrarily or capriciously or that his decision was grossly ...
... supported by the evidence upon which such decision was based . Limiting the right of judicial review to decisions where the evidence shows that the contracting officer acted arbitrarily or capriciously or that his decision was grossly ...
Page 30
... supported by substantial evidence , the court should be authorized to award the contractor , notwithstanding such officer , board , or representative , the amount , if any , that would be due the contractor on the evidence presented to ...
... supported by substantial evidence , the court should be authorized to award the contractor , notwithstanding such officer , board , or representative , the amount , if any , that would be due the contractor on the evidence presented to ...
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
Accounting Office action administrative decision administrative officers ALAN JOHNSTONE alleged and proved arbitrary article 15 attorney authority bill Board of Contract capricious Chairman committee Comptroller Congress construction Contract Appeals contracting agencies counsel Court of Claims decided department head Department of Defense determination disputed questions disputes clause district courts enacted fact arising February 15 Federal final and conclusive finality clause fraud fraudulent GASKINS Government contracting officers gross mistake grossly erroneous HARNEY hearing imply bad faith intention to cheat involved JOHNSON judicial review Judiciary jurisdiction legislation litigation MACOMBER matter MCGUIRE ment Moorman necessarily implied bad November 26 parties PAT MCCARRAN PHILLIPS procedure proposed provision questions of fact questions of law relief remedy review of decisions Ripley rule SELTZER Senator HENDRICKSON Senator KILGORE specifications standard form statement subcommittee substantial evidence supported by substantial Supreme Court tion tracting United States Court United States Senate Washington Wunderlich decision Yates
Popular passages
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 89 - ... unforeseeable causes beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Contractor, including, but not restricted to, acts of God, or of the public enemy, acts of the Government...
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...