Public Contracts in Legal Globalisation — Project on Contract Administration Disputes — Presentation on December 13, 2019

Professor Chris Jansen (VU Amsterdam) and Professor Patricia Valcárcel Fernández (University of Vigo), members of the academic consortium Public Contracts in Legal Globalisation, are undertaking a detailed (and quite interesting) study of contract administration law in the European Union, to assess the relationship between competition and contract administration.  They presented on this project at the consortium’s meeting at the University of Paris – Nanterre (La Defense campus) on December 13, 2019. They describe their project as follows:

Chris Jansen – VU Amsterdam

This project seeks to investigate, problematize, and clarify the possible interaction between the competition interest, as well as its regulation, inherent in competitive tendering on the one hand, and the execution of public contracts and concession contracts on the other. The project is based on the assumption that the particular factual and legal context of competitive tendering must be taken into account by the courts when they apply rules of substantive law in order to resolve issues related to the execution of contracts. If this assumption turns out to be correct, it would further mean that the resolving of issues by the courts could, in its turn, have an impact on the competition interest. If that is indeed proven to be the case, the results of the project could be relevant for the further debate on public procurement regulation. 

Based on the aforesaid assumptions, this project seeks to answer the following three research questions. (1) In the event that a national court of law must resolve issues regarding the execution of a public contract or a concession contract by applying rules of substantive law (general administrative law; general private law; common law, depending on the legal system concerned), will the court take into account the particular factual and legal context of the competitive tendering procedure? If so: how will the court do this? If not: why not? to indicate those rules that relate to the award of public contracts and concession contracts by means of competitive tendering procedures. Another factual difference relates to the bargaining power of the parties involved in the two situations. In the second situation, it is possible – although not necessarily so – that the two private parties will have had equal bargaining power when they negotiated the content of their contract. In the first situation, however, it is inherent in the competitive tendering procedure that the contracting authority will have had the power to dominate the content of the subsequent contract.(2) To what extent is it possible to problematize and/or unify the various approaches that are found in the answers to question (1)? (3) Based on the aforesaid analysis, to what extent is it possible and necessary to give recommendations to national courts, legislators and perhaps even the supranational legislators (e.g. the European Union) as regards the subject matter?  

As the project description suggests, this study relates directly to what may the next wave of reform in procurement in the European Union — a critical reassessment of public contract administration law (and forums), which is also a focus of the upcoming March 16, 2020 symposium at King’s College, London.

The full project description is included below.

Procurement Classes at University of Paris – Nanterre

On December 9-11, Chris Yukins taught classes with Professor Laurence Folliott-Lalliot at the University of Paris – Nanterre, at the university’s classrooms in La Defense.

Materials

Amazon Web Services (AWS) Complaint in JEDI Protest

Board of Contract Appeals Bar Association (BCABA) Conference at GWU Law — on Ethics in Practice

Dismas (Dis) Locaria (Venable), Danica (Dani) Irvine (U.S. DoD), Stuart Bender (USDA) and Terry Elling (Holland & Knight)

The Board of Contract Appeals Bar Association (BCABA) and the George Washington University Law School were pleased to host the BCABA’s annual Policy Colloquium. This year’s program focused on Ethics and Professionalism in Government Contracts Practice.  The speakers and panelists included senior government and private practitioners who shared their knowledge and experiences on a variety of government ethics regulatory issues and best practices in the counseling and litigation settings.  Holland & Knight’s Terry Elling was the program moderator.

Tom Davis (Holland & Knight)
  • Former congressman Tom Davis was the keynote speaker, and he spoke warmly of the bar’s role in ensuring integrity in our system.
  • Stuart Bender, Director of the Office of Ethics at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) presented on legal and government ethics issues, and discussed the USDA Ethics App, which has been lauded for using ethics “games” to encourage learning.
  • Danica (Dani) Irvine, of the Defense Department’s Standards of Conduct Office, joined other panelists in discussing compliance challenges, including the use of screening questionnaires such as DD 2945 to screen for possible conflicts of interest in post-government employment.

The program was held at the Faculty Conference Center, George Washington University Law School on Tuesday, December 3, 2019.