VIEWS: 8 PAGES: 4 CATEGORY: Law POSTED ON: 5/22/2010
"32 The contract required the contractor to pay a concession fee that was based on the total sales of travel services.33 In July of 2005, Rodgers filed a claim with the Air Force contracting officer seeking reimbursement of concession fees that he had paid on international airline tickets in the amount of $3,116.34 About four months later, prior to the contracting officer's issuance of a decision on the claim, Rodgers filed an appeal at the COFC under the Contract Disputes Act35 seeking reimbursement of the concession fees and also its other expenses totaling $82,635.97.36 The COFC dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the appeal concerned a contract between a Rodgers and a NAFI, which is not an entity subject to the Tucker Act.37 Rodgers appealed the COFC's decision to the CAFC which affirmed the lower court's decision.38 The CAFC purportedly based its decision on the NAFI Doctrine stating that the CAFC "lacks jurisdiction over an action against the United States in which congressionally appropriated funds cannot be used to pay the resulting judgment.
Non-Appropriated Fund Contracting CAFC and COFC Cons
Pages to are hidden for
"Non-Appropriated Fund Contracting"Please download to view full document