LITIGATION ON PUBLIC CONTRACT PERFORMANCE

Thierry Kirat (1) , Laurent Vidal (2)

1 IRISECREP - Institut de recherche interdisciplinaire en socio-économie - Centres de Recherches et d'Etudes Politiques
2 Centre de recherche en droit public economique

Comparative law applied to public contracts usually concentrates more
on the tendering process than on performance issues. This Article focuses
on the latter: it deals with cases in which performance of public contracts
in the United States and France leads to litigation. The Article's objectives
are threefold: fi rst, to synthesize the fi ndings of an empirical analysis of the
sources and nature of performance issues that lead to litigation before administrative
courts (namely, the General Services Board of Contract Appeals
and the Cours administratives d'Appel and the Conseil d'État); second, to
provide an analysis of the way in which American and French administrative
judges tackle and decide contract cases; and third, to broaden the perspective
in order to provide a more comprehensive comparative analysis of the legal
context in which regulation, case law, and the styles of administrative judges'
reasoning affect the treatment of additional costs and contract equilibrium
issues in both countries.

Mots clés: Public Contract Law; Performance; Litigation; Comparative Analysis; France; United States

Domaines: Droit

Thierry Kirat, Laurent Vidal. LITIGATION ON PUBLIC CONTRACT PERFORMANCE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY
OF THE TREATMENT OF ADDITIONAL COSTS
AND CONTRACT EQUILIBRIUM BY ADMINISTRATIVE
JUDGES IN THE UNITED STATES AND FRANCE. Public Contract Law Journal, 2008, 38 (1), pp.154-185. ⟨halshs-00365390⟩