5 GCA § 5427

Authority to Resolve Contract and Breach of Contract Controversies

Guam Code AnnotatedTitle 5 — Government Operations

(a)Applicability. This Section applies to controversies between Guam and a contractor and which arise under, or by virtue of, a contract between them. This includes without limitation controversies based upon breach of contract, mistake, misrepresentation, or other cause for contract modification or rescission.

(b)Authority. The Chief Procurement Officer, the Director of Public Works, the head of a purchasing agency, or a designee of one of these officers is authorized, prior to commencement of an action in a court concerning the controversy, to settle and resolve a controversy described in Subsection

(a)of this Section. This authority shall be exercised in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Policy Office.

(c)Decision. If such a controversy is not resolved by mutual agreement, the Chief Procurement Officer, the Director of Public Works, the head of a purchasing agency, or the designee of one of these officers shall promptly issue a decision in writing. The decision shall:

(1)state the reasons for the action taken; and

(2)inform the contractor of its rights to judicial or administrative review as provided in this Chapter.

(d)Notice of Decision. A copy of the decision under Subsection

(c)of this Section shall be mailed or otherwise furnished immediately to the contractor.

(e)Finality of Decision. The decision reached pursuant to Subsection

(c)of this Section shall be final and conclusive, unless fraudulent, or the contractor appeals administratively to the Public Auditor in accordance with § 5706 of this Chapter.

(f)Failure to Render Timely Decision. If the Chief Procurement Officer, the Director of Public Works, the head of a purchasing agency, or the designee of one of these officers does not issue the written decision required under Subsection

(c)of this Section within sixty

(60)days after written request for a final decision, or within such longer period as may be agreed upon by the parties, then the contractor may proceed as if an adverse decision had been received.

§ The story of this section

Amended by P.L. 18-44 § 6 (bill & sponsor pending — earlier Legislature not yet ingested)
Amended by P.L. 28-68 § IV — introduced as Bill 11-28

Interpreted by the courts:

2000 Guam 19 — Pacific Rock Corporation v. Department of Education, a department of the Executive Branch of the Government of Guam, an (2000) · per Benjamin J.F. Cruz, J.
2001 Guam 21 — Pacific Rock Corporation v. Department of Education (2001) · per F. Philip Carbullido, J.
2001 Guam 23 — Sumitomo Construction Co., Ltd. v. Government of Guam (2001) · per F. Philip Carbullido, J.
2007 Guam 10 — William M. Limtiaco, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Guam Fire Department, Government of Guam, and Michael Uncangco, in his offi (2007) · per F. Philip Carbullido, J.
2020 Guam 14 — DFS GUAM L.P., Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant vs. The A.B. Won Pat International Airport Authority, Guam, Defendant- (2020) · per Katherine A. Maraman, J.
2020 Guam 20 — DFS Guam L.P., Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant, v. The A.B. Won Pat International Airport Authority, Guam, Defendant- (2020) · per Katherine A. Maraman, J.

Reconstructed from the Guam Code Annotated. For the authoritative version, see the official PDF.