We enforced an oral agreement between our client and the United States, resulting in our client receiving a multimillion dollar settlement.
The US Government (USG) asked our client to build, supply and maintain a battlefield camp to support Iraqi forces that would join US forces during the Second Battle of Fallujah. Our client verbally agreed to provide the services, only to find out before contract execution that the Interim Iraqi Government (IIG), not the USG, would it contracting partner and responsible for payment.
Our client declined to sign the contract, citing concerns about getting paid from the IIG. USG contracting personnel then present verbally promised our client that the USG would facilitate payment from the IIG. With that verbal assurance, our client signed the contract and began performing.
Our client completed contract performance under very difficult circumstances, including numerous firefights. Although our client completed the contract under these circumstances, the IIG refused to pay our client the complete contract price, much less an equitable adjustment to compensate our client for the additional security it was directed to hire.
For a variety of reasons, filing suit against the IIG was not an option. We determined that our client could sue the USG in the Court of Federal Claims under the Tucker Act, asserting separate causes of action for breach of contract related to the additional security forces the USG directed our client to hire and the express oral agreement to facilitate payment to our client from the IIG.
The USG filed several motions to dismiss the lawsuit on various grounds, but our case survived, and, as a result, we were able to negotiate a favorable settlement on behalf of our client, recovering millions of dollars our client had spent performing the project.
