617696187362391

Philips Lighting North American Corporation

July 30, 2020Judge Woodrow
Partially SustainedPayment / Progress Payments / Financing

Philips Lighting North American Corporation appealed against the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority regarding payment obligations under a contract for upgrading lighting systems. The Board granted partial summary judgment in favor of Philips concerning payment but denied it regarding allegations of breach of good faith.

Material Facts

  • Philips is a corporation involved in the manufacture and installation of lighting systems.
  • WMATA was created by an interstate compact to operate a regional transportation system.
  • The contract required Philips to upgrade lighting fixtures and install metering equipment.
  • The contract established a construction phase followed by a maintenance phase with payments based on energy savings.
  • Philips completed the construction phase by February 2017 and submitted invoices totaling $4,204,551.88.
  • WMATA has made no payments under the contract.

Parties

Appellant
Philips Lighting North American Corporation
Respondent Agency
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Contract Number
CQ-12077
Open Official Decision PDF (asbca.mil)AI-analyzed, grounded in the decision text. Verify against the official PDF before relying on it.

Full Legal Analysis

Create a free account to read the complete grounded legal brief for this decision, including the holding, every issue the Board decided, quantum, verified citations, and the case's citation graph.

Holding & Legal Reasoning

The Board's holding, background, and procedural posture for this decision.

Issues Presented

Every issue the Board decided, with its determination, reasoning, and supporting authority.

Quantum & Recovery

The claimed, awarded, and net dollar amounts at issue, itemized where the record supports it.

Verified Authorities & Citations

Every cited FAR, DFARS, CAS, and case-law authority, cross-checked against the source text.

Practitioner Takeaways

Practical guidance for contractors and counsel, distilled from the Board's ruling.

Similar Cases

Related decisions surfaced by semantic search across the full analyzed corpus.

Citation Graph

An interactive graph of this case's cited authorities, judge, agency, and related decisions.

Related Decisions

Same Judge

Same Year

Same Issue

Newsletter

New decisions every Monday

GovConDash Weekly lists the decisions GAO, the boards, the courts and SBA OHA released that week, alongside the FAR Overhaul deviations and proposed rules that reach every contractor. Free.

Free, weekly, and one click to unsubscribe. We send a confirmation email first. See our Privacy Policy.