Originally Posted by
Bengo
Something similar would be perfectly normal in a UK commercial contract, so I expect MoD has suitable words somewhere in Defence Contract Terms. It will in effect say that if the first contractor fails to perform the contracted duties the client may employ a second contractor and charge the extra costs to the first contractor...
I would be surprised if contractors signed up to an agreement that might have an open ended liability like that. In an extreme case what would stop a Defence organisation from say failing a training helicopter supply contract on a minor point then replacing the capability with a heavy lift helicopter as a supposed 'training' capability replacement and claiming the cost as compensation.
I can understand claiming costs associated with any support infrastructure or training that was required for a 'failed' type that is no longer suitable for its replacement and also the costs associated with the original acquisition project management (which wouldn't be trivial) that now has to be repeated.