In Prof’l. Serv. Indus. Inc. v. United States, the Court of Federal Claims sustained a protest of a corrective action that the Federal Highway Administration took in the wake of a GAO decision that the awardee’s proposed program manager lacked the requisite experience. The court found that the agency’s decision to amend the solicitation was arbitrary and capricious because the agency changed the required qualifications for the program manager—in a manner that conformed to the original awardee’s proposal—rather than conducting a re-evaluation of the proposals under the un-amended solicitation’s criteria.
- How-to guide How-to guide: How to identify relevant sanctions regimes and deal with conflicting obligations (USA) Recently updated
- Checklist Checklist: Competition law compliance (UK)
- Checklist Checklist: Staff awareness and training to prevent money laundering and terrorist financing (USA) Recently updated