Court Opinion

ID: 9490522
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 13:45:39.82224+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:54:08.711201
License: Public Domain

LOURIE, Circuit Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the decision of the court, which concludes, inter alia, that *1585the LSA did not give the government immunity from nonperformance of the contract.
I interpret Article V, paragraph 4, as immunizing the government from liability for nonperformance of launch services. Moreover, I do not agree that other provisions of the contract compel us to ignore the plain language of this provision. Given the circumstances behind the failure to perform by the government, I cannot accept that “best efforts” were not undertaken. The specific termination provisions of Article VII also do not abrogate the clear waiver of liability in Article V, paragraph 4. The provision of certain rights of termination in the government, coupled with a recitation of financial obligations that pertain in such an event, is not inconsistent with a waiver of responsibility, Parties often provide for multiple protections in a contract. Finally, a contract providing f°r undertakings between the parties, with certain immunities and rights of termination, is not bordering on voidness. Thus, while the majority attempts to slide away from the clear import of Article V, I cannot. I would affirm,