October 22, 2007

EDITOR'S NOTES

In 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, “Arbitration is a matter of contract and a party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any dispute which he has not agreed so to submit.” AT&T Techs., Inc. v. Communications Workers of Am., 475 U.S. 643, 648 (1986). This week’s first case, which mentions the above citation, extends the question of arbitrability to third parties—in this case, a contractor’s performance bond surety. If the contract between the builder and surety does not require arbitration but includes, by reference, the contract between builder and owner, which does require arbitration for disputes, can the owner compel the surety to arbitrate? In a legal culture where arbitration is often the favored method of dispute resolution, the topic is worthy of ongoing discussions.

In the next case, a state legislature leaves several questions unanswered after it adds some exceptions to its procurement code. And finally, the ASBCA reviews a case in which it must determine if consultant and attorney fees are permissible for contract administration costs.

Subscribers: click here for the full story

Non-Subscribers: click here to subscribe