Government Contracts and Distance Learning: How the United States Can Improve Convenience Terminations by looking to Australia

Abstract

Despite similar strategic and procurement interests, defense contracting practices vary between the United States and Australia. This comparative paper discusses how both countries approach termination for convenience (TFC) in defense contracts, ultimately arguing that the use of TFC clauses in U.S. government contracts is exercised too broadly. Minor, but impactful, reform is posited based on Australia’s approach. Limiting the exercise of a TFC clause to times of exigency, or where performance of the contract is no longer practicable, is likely to limit a contractor’s risk associated with fulfillment of a government contract, minimize policy harms and could serve to bolster the government’s position in the commercial marketplace.