The general rules in 9.505-1 through 9.505-4 prescribe limitations on contracting as the means of avoiding, neutralizing, or mitigating organizational conflicts of interest that might otherwise exist in the stated situations. Some illustrative examples are provided in 9.508. Conflicts may arise in situations not expressly covered in this section 9.505 or in the examples in 9.508. Each individual contracting situation should be examined on the basis of its particular facts and the nature of the proposed contract. The exercise of common sense, good judgment, and sound discretion is required in both the decision on whether a significant potential conflict exists and, if it does, the development of an appropriate means for resolving it. The two underlying principles are—
(a) Preventing the existence of conflicting roles that might bias a contractor's judgment; and
(b) Preventing unfair competitive advantage. In addition to the other situations described in this subpart, an unfair competitive advantage exists where a contractor competing for award of any Federal contract possesses—
(1) Proprietary information that was obtained from a Government official without proper authorization; or
(2) Source selection information (as defined in 2.101) that is relevant to the contract but is not available to all competitors, and such information would assist that contractor in obtaining the contract.
[48 FR 42142, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 55 FR 42686, Oct. 22, 1990; 56 FR 55377, Oct. 25, 1991; 62 FR 232, Jan. 2, 1997; 64 FR 32748, June 17, 1999; 67 FR 13063, Mar. 20, 2002; 84 FR 19845, May 6, 2019]
Notes of Decisions
Filtration Dev. Co. v. United States, 60 Fed. Cl. 371 (Fed. Cl. 2004).
· cites it 6× “Given the “highly influential and responsible position” of contractors performing systems engineering and technical direction, 48 C.F.R. § 9.505 -l(b), the FAR contains the following explicit prohibition: A contractor that provides systems engineering and technical direction for…”
Pai Corp. v. United States, 614 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2010).
· cites it 3× “2009) (citing 48 C.F.R. § 9.505 ). FAR requires that “[e]ach individual contracting situation should be examined on the basis of its particular facts and the nature of the proposed contract.”
Axiom Resource Mgmt., Inc. v. United States, 564 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
“See 48 C.F.R. § 9.505 (“Each individual contracting situation should be examined on the basis of its particular facts and the nature of the proposed contract.”
Inserso Corp. v. United States, 961 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2020).
“” 48 C.F.R. § 9.505 . Section 9.505 describes the dual aims of “[p]reventing the existence of conflicting roles that might bias a contractor’s judgment” and “[p]reventing unfair com- petitive advantage.”
Turner Const. Co., Inc. v. United States, 645 F.3d 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
· cites it 2× “2009) (citing 48 C.F.R. § 9.505 ). The FAR requires that “[e]ach individual contracting situation should be examined on the basis of its particular facts and the nature of the proposed contract.”
Axiom Resource Mgmt., Inc. v. United States, 78 Fed. Cl. 576 (Fed. Cl. 2007).
· cites it 2× “” 48 C.F.R. § 9.505 . 19 ii. The Contracting Officer Initially Failed, But Later, Identified And Analyzed One Potential Organizational Conflict Of Interest.”
Myers v. Alutiiq Int'l Solutions, LLC, 811 F. Supp. 2d 261 (D.D.C. 2011).
“” 48 C.F.R. § 9.505 . The FAR also prohibits personal conflicts of interest: Government business shall be conducted in a manner above reproach and, except as authorized by statute or regulation, with complete impartiality and with preferential treatment for none.”
Sotera Def. Solutions, Inc. v. United States, 118 Fed. Cl. 237 (Fed. Cl. 2014).
“See 48 C.F.R. § 9.505 ("Each individual contracting situation should be examined on the basis of its particular facts and the nature of the proposed contract.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.