Hijackers took the contractor’s equipment. The contractor said the government was liable. The ASBCA disagreed. The contractor knew operating in Afghanistan was risky. What’s more, the contractor could have requested additional security but never exercised that right.
Appeal of Alfajer, Ltd., ASBCA No. 62125
- The Claim – The contractor had a BPA to provide equipment in Afghanistan. Hijackers took the contractor’s equipment as the contractor tried to remove it from a military base. The contractor submitted a claim for the cost of the equipment. The government denied the claim. The contractor appealed to the ASBCA.
- Abandoned Claims – The contractor asserted claims for breach of contract, superior knowledge, and breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. The government asserted affirmative defenses and arguments to counter the breach of contract and superior knowledge claims. The contractor did not respond to those arguments. The board found the contractor had abandoned those claims.
- Good Faith and Fair Dealing – The contractor alleged the government breached the duty of good faith and fair dealing by allowing the contractor additional time to mobilize but not providing the same amount of time to demobilize. The board said this wasn’t a breach. The government may have relaxed terms for mobilization, but that did not mean it had to disregard other contract terms. What’s more, the contractor knew operating in Afghanistan was dangerous. The contract also allowed the contractor to request additional security. But the contractor never availed itself of that right. The board found no breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing.
The contractor is represented by Walt Pennigton of Pennington Law Firm. The government is represented by Scott N. Flesch, Major James S. Kim, and Dana J. Chase of the Army
–Case summary by Craig LaChance, Senior Editor
