Essay by lilacserenityUniversity, Bachelor'sA+, October 2004

download word file, 4 pages 4.5

Downloaded 43 times

Summary of the Facts.

In July of 1965, Loral was awarded a $6,000,000 contract by the Navy for the production of radar sets. The contract contained a schedule of deliveries, a liquidated damages clause applying to late deliveries and a cancellation clause in case of default by Loral. The latter thereupon solicited bids for some 40 precision gear components needed to produce the radar sets, and awarded Austin a subcontract to supply 23 such parts. That party commenced delivery in early 1966.

In May 1966, Loral was awarded a second Navy contract for the production of more radar sets and again went about soliciting bids. Austin bid on all 40 gear components but, on July 15, a representative from Loral informed Austin's president that his company would be awarded the subcontract only for those items on which it was low bidder. The Austin officer refused to accept an order for less than all 40 of the gear parts and on the next day he told Loral that Austin would cease deliveries of the parts due under the existing subcontract unless Loral consented to substantial increases in the process provided for by that agreement--both retroactively for parts already delivered and prospectively on those not yet shipped--and placed with Austin the order for all 40 parts needed under Loral's second Navy contract.

Shortly thereafter, Austin stopped delivery. After contacting 10 manufactures of precision gears and finding none who could produce the parts in time to meet its commitments to the Navy, Loral acceded to Austin's demands by sending a letter dated July 22.

Loral thereupon consented to the price increases insisted upon by Austin under the first subcontract and the latter was awarded a second subcontract making it the supplier of all 40 gear parts for Loral's second contract with...