Default Termination Ruled Invalid Based on Contracting Officer Representative’s “Hostility” and “History of Dishonesty”

Oles Morrison – Despite acknowledging that an “objective inquiry” and not “subjective beliefs” is appropriate to determine the validity of a default termination, the Court of Federal Claims ruled that the government’s default termination was invalid based in part on the Contracting Officer Representative’s (COR) “hostility” towards the contractor and “history of dishonesty” during the Project.  Such a decision may open the door for contractors who—in addition to other factors—ask Courts to consider the government’s subjective actions or motives in determining whether the project owner had a basis to terminate.