Government Files Lawsuit against Fluor Companies

On November 8, 2012, the Department of Justice announced that the United States government is intervening in a case against Fluor Corporation and its subsidiary, Fluor Hanford Inc, after the Texas-based companies used federal funds for lobbying activity. The lawsuit for violations of the False Claims Act was first filed by a whistleblower, Loydene Rambo.

According to the Justice Department, Fluor had a contract with the Department of Energy (DOE) for multiple services at the Hanford Nuclear Site in Washington State between 1999 and 2008. The facility is federally funded.

According to the original complaint, part of the DOE contract stated that Fluor could not use the federal funds for lobbying. The whistle blower’s complaint alleged that Fluor used the funds for lobbying from 2005 to 2008 anyway. The company hired two lobbying firms, Secure Horizons LLC and Congressional Strategies LLC, to lobby members of Congress and federal agencies.

The United States has agreed to intervene in the case against Fluor, but the government will not intervene in cases against Secure Horizons LLC and Congressional Strategies LLC. Since Ms. Rambo filed the lawsuit under the False Claims Act, she can share a percentage of the recovery with the United States government.

Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of the Department of Justice, stated: “The taxpayer money Congress allocated for this program was for training federal emergency response personnel and first responders, not to lobby Congress and other for more funding. When public funds are misused, as alleged in this case, the Justice Department will work to restore them to the Treasury.”

The Civil Division of the Justice Department and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Washington are handling the case and receiving assistance from the Department of Energy Office of Inspector General.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice

All You Need to Know On How to Revise a Policy

A policy, by definition, is a set of principles or rules that are implemented for the purpose of obtaining or reaching a particular outcome or goal. Therefore, policies, in essence, exist in a variety of endless contexts.

Though a policy may be implemented for a particular time achieving the intended purpose, it may prove necessary to amend or revise a policy. Revising a policy can take various routes.

Revising a policy will usually be at the discretion of the entities or parties that implement the policy in the first place. In devising a policy, it is common that procedures in the changing or revising of the policy be included for future reference or circumstance. Each individual policy that exists and the actual actions or procedures involved in revising a policy will differ in accordance to the needs of the faction or party and the changes that are to take place.

Verbal Contract V. Written Contract

Contract law in the legal context of the United States generally allows for a contract which is called into being by the exchange of verbal expressions to be as valid as one which is set forth in writing. This general provision for a verbal contract may, however, be modified in certain jurisdictions by specific contract law requirements for a contract to be set down in specific circumstances and toward specific ends. Moreover, contract law for an area may or may not provide for the difficulties which can arise in carrying out a verbal contract.

The lack of a written contract can present problems in terms of the lack of proof as to what was agreed to under contract law. As such, judges administering contract law may be forced to apply a standard of fairness in order to resolve the contract dispute. In this way, a verbal contract, while valid, may not be effective.

Promissory Estoppel Overview

What is Promissory Estoppel?

In a general sense, Promissory Estoppel is a legal doctrine used in American law, which allows a party to recover on a promise, even if the promise was made without a formal consideration. In essence, a Promissory Estoppel prevents an individual from arguing that an underlying promise offered should not be upheld.

In addition, a Promissory Estoppel requires that a reliance on the promise was deemed reasonable and that the individual attempting to enforce the promise actually relied on the promise to his or her detriment. As is common with numerous forms of legality issues, the precise legal requirements needed to enact Promissory Estoppel may vary between jurisdictions within the United States.

A common example of Promissory Estoppel is where an employer offers an oral promise to pay an employee a monthly amount for the remainder of the individual’s retirement. If the employee relies on the promise and subsequently retires, the employer will likely be estopped, based on the principle of a promissory estoppel, from reneging on this promise to offer the monthly retirement payment.

Laws surrounding a Promissory Estoppel:

In a typical case of a promise or a contract, the law requires that a party receive consideration for the agreement. Consideration refers to a valuable asset that is exchanged between the two parties and the time of the agreement or the promise was made. Consideration can take the form of an asset, the exchange of monies, or the promise to refrain from doing something. Regardless of the form of consideration required in a contract, a consideration is needed in order to make an agreement or promise legally enforceable.

That being said, because the court system aims to achieve fairness, a legal forum will apply the doctrine of promissory estoppel in situations where a consideration is made. Even if an enforceable contract is not generated, the law may enforce the promise if a reasonable reliance and detriment are proven.

Differences between the Promissory Estoppel Doctrine and the Doctrine of Estoppel:

A promissory estoppel relies on a promise, while the doctrine of estoppel relies on a statement of fact. As a result of this foundational difference, the two doctrines complicate contractual agreements or the statement of a promise. Even if an agreement is not based on a formal consideration and even if promissory estoppel is not enforceable, because the situation did not include a promise, a court system can still enforce the “agreement” as a means to promote fairness.

This somewhat loose interpretation of promissory estoppel enables the court to impose obligations on the parties through the delivery of a quasi-contract—a doctrine that implied in law.

Contract vs. Agreement

The essential differences between a contract and an agreement are minor. In essence, a contract’s outline is more formal and more rigidly presented than the terms outlined in an agreement.

A contract is a legally binding agreement reached between two parties, the terms of which the courts have the authority and obligation to enforce. An agreement is a less formal creation of an obligation between the two parties.

An agreement usually lacks one or more of the essential elements that are required to be present in order to form a valid contract that will be considered legally enforceable by a court of law.

Contracts outline the terms of the relationship that should be formed between the two parties to the contract. An agreement also outlines the terms of the relationship between the two. However, the difference is that the contract’s outline is far more rigid than that of a contract.

The essential difference between an agreement and a contract is that typically an agreement will only modify a contract that is already in place but does not place an obligation on either one of the parties to provide consideration to the other party, which a contract requires. A contract can involve the exchange of promises between the parties to the contract, while an agreement may simply involve one party accepting the offer from another party.

Definition of Designation

Designation is the term used to describe ownership one has over something. Designation is used commonly with wills and trusts. Designation of record is what the writer of the will or trust creates to submit to the court so that the court knows and understands who is in full control of the contract and the individual’s estates and assets after they have passed.

Designation of Record must be completed with the creator of the contract, the individual who will hold designation, and a lawyer. After the creator and the designator have settled on an agreement, the Designation of Record will then be signed off on and delivered to the court. Finally, the court will approve of the documents and the contract will be put into place. Generally, the contract will go into immediate effect at this point.

Contract In Depth

A contract is a legal document which may be enforceable by legal action or by binding arbitration. In order for this to be true, however, the contract agreement must meet several important requirements.

There must be a compensatory remedy for the contract under which the party which defaults is required to pay monetary compensation that would have otherwise been provided had the contract agreement been upheld, or an equitable remedy, which can also be called Specific Performance. The equitable remedy, or specific performance, compels an individual who enters into a contract agreement to carry out the action against which they have attempted to renege on their obligation.

In order for a contract to be valid, the contract must involve unqualified, or “mirror”, acceptance. In order for a contract agreement to be valid, all parties must have the capacity to contract, and the terms of the contract cannot be trifling, indeterminate, or impossible. In the eyes of the law, a contract cannot be entered into to compel illegal action.

Although a contract is usually written in order to compel action, a contract agreement can also be created which will prevent a person from performing an act which they have the legal capacity to perform.

If a contract agreement is breached, legal remedies may be provided to address that breach.

Contract law, the legal field that specializes in the legal disposition of contracts and contract agreements, generally adheres to the Latin motto “pacta sunt servana,” meaning “pacts [agreements] must be kept.”

All You Need to Know About the Roman Law

What is Roman law?

Roman law was the formal legal system of ancient Rome; Roman law accounts for the legal developments that occurred before the seventh century AD. During this period, the Roman-Byzantine state adopted Greek as the official language for the governing bodies of the land.

The development of Roman law took more than a thousand years of jurisprudence, for it evolved from the Twelve Tables to the Corpus Juris Civilis, which was ordered by Justinian 1.

The Justinian Code, a formal Roman law that arose from the aforementioned jurisprudence, served as the basis for legal procedure throughout continental Europe, Ethiopia and the majority of former colonies of European nations.

Development of Roman law:

Before the Twelve Tables were formulated, private law in Rome was comprised of civil law and was applied only to Roman citizens. The earliest formation of Roman law was bonded to religion with distinct attributes related to formalism, conservatism and symbolism. This foundation of a legal field was predominantly governed by the ruling king; the majority of citizens lacked fixed rights under this framework.

The first formal text of Roman law was developed through the Law of the Twelve Tables. The Law of Twelve Tables was created in the middle of the fifth century BC; TerentiliusArsa, a plebian tribune, proposed that Roman law should be affirmed in writing, to prevent magistrates from applying arbitrary laws.

After years of political struggle, the plebian class convinced the patricians to form a delegation and meet in Athens, to affirm the laws of Solon through written documentation. In 451 BC, ten Roman citizens were chosen to record the laws; during this process, the men were given supreme political power—a transferring of power that ultimately restricted the authority of the magistrates.

In 450 BC, the decemviriproduced laws on ten tablets; however, these laws were regarded as a meager attempt by the plebians. A second decemvirate then added two additional tablets in 449 BC; this new law, the Law of the Twelve Tablets, was subsequently approved by the people’s assembly.

Early Roman law:

Following the creation of the 12 tablets, Roman law began to formulate itself into the ruling framework over the land. Many laws of the 12 tablets ultimately created a modernized society that effectively managed the behaviors of citizens through the institution of an affirmed legal code.

Early Roman law consisted of numerous laws that ultimately formed a balanced society; for instance, laws were created to allow the marriage between plebeians and patricians—a fundamental law that effectively agglomerated society through the destruction of social barriers. Another important statute of early Roman law is regarded as the root for modern tort law; LexAquilla, the name of the statute, provided compensation to the owners of property that was injured by another citizens’ fault or negligent actions.

Arguably the most important contribution that early Roman law possessed was not the enactment of statutes, but the emergence of a class of jurists and the creation of a legal science.

Oral Contract Vs Implied Contract?

According to contract law, an oral contract is not considered an implied contract. An oral contract is an agreement that is agreed upon only by spoken communication. Although an oral contract originates from the mouth, it is common for a written contract to be created after the oral contract is stated.

In contract law, oral contracts are considered just as valid as written contracts. Some jurisdictions require that a contract be written up after an oral contract is made. Within this type of circumstance, the document must state that the original agreement was created verbally.

An implied contract is an agreement that is not generally agreed upon. Instead, it is something that is more assumed to be followed. An example of this type of contract would be an employment contract where the employer does not specify hours but does specify the total amount of time required to be worked.

Important Requirements of Contract Law You Must Know

Contract law is the branch of law which addresses the rights and obligations which legally bind parties together. Contract law is legally enforced as a type of contract which is a certain agreement in which two or more parties agree on

specific terms. Contract law is based off of the Latin phrase “pacta sunt servanda”, which means agreements to be kept.

Contract law is regulated and enforced by the court system. Contract laws consist of the protection and regulation of: trusts, wills, loans, and work contracts.

If a person breaks a contract it is known as a breach of contract and the person can be penalized for breaking a contract law. Generally, for a contract to be accepted in contract law, it must consist of certain requirements. Some requirements include:

Consent to contract;

Intention to create a legal relationship;

Lawfulness of purpose; and

Mutual agreement and acceptance of the contact.

Contract Law

Read This Before Entering Into A Quasi Contract

Deed Poll

Government Files Lawsuit against Fluor Companies

All You Need to Know On How to Revise a Policy

Verbal Contract V. Written Contract

Promissory Estoppel Overview

Contract vs. Agreement

Definition of Designation

Contract In Depth

All You Need to Know About the Roman Law

Oral Contract Vs Implied Contract?

Important Requirements of Contract Law You Must Know

Easy Guide to Contract Law

All You Need to Know About Sustainable Construction

Contractor Explained

Find Out All You Need to Know About Construction Worker

Important Facts About Breach of Contract

Read This Before Entering Into A Quasi Contract

All You Need to Know About the Roman Law

Must Know Facts About Tenancy Agreement

Important Details on Service Level Agreement

Quick Outline of the Marital Settlement Agreement