ARTICLE
11 August 2026

ASBCA Denies Government Motion To Dismiss, Providing Key Guidance On Contractor Claim Standards Post-ECC International

CM
Crowell & Moring LLP

Contributor

Our founders aspired to create a different kind of law firm when they launched Crowell & Moring in 1979. From those bold beginnings, our mission has been to provide our clients with the best services of any law firm in the world through a spirit of trust, respect, cooperation, collaboration, and a commitment to giving back to the communities around us.
The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals ruled in favor of a contractor in a construction delay case, rejecting the government's motion to dismiss claims based on alleged failures to state sum certain amounts and improper claim presentation. The decision provides critical guidance on post-ECC International standards for contractor claims under the Contract Disputes Act, particularly regarding how delay claims organized by windows analysis satisfy jurisdictional requirements.
United States Government, Public Sector
Stephen J. McBrady’s articles from Crowell & Moring LLP are most popular:
  • with readers working within the Securities & Investment industries

In Appeal of Bahadir (a C&M case), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals denied the government’s motion to dismiss in its entirety, ruling in favor of the contractor on both key issues raised by the government. The case arises from a contract for construction work at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, under which Appellant alleged government-caused delay and filed certified prolongation claims using a “windows analysis” methodology. The government moved to dismiss, arguing that Appellant failed to state a sum certain for each of what the government characterized as 38 distinct claims, and separately that four claims had not been properly presented to the Contracting Officer. 

The Board rejected both of the government’s arguments, relying on the Federal Circuit’s 2023 decision in ECC International Constructors v. Secretary of the Army, 79 F.4th 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2023) to confirm that a disagreement over whether a claim comprises of one or multiple claims (each requiring a sum certain) is a factual dispute to be resolved on the merits, not a basis for dismissal. The Board held that because Appellant organized its claims by delay windows and a sum certain could be calculated for each window, the sum certain requirement was satisfied. While not the first post-ECC International decision to address these issues, this ruling provides one of the clearest and most direct ASBCA statements on the applicable standard for the now non-jurisdictional review of contractor claims under the Contract Disputes Act, and will serve as meaningful guidance for contractors navigating similar claims.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More