On the eve of the Vicksburg campaign in October 1862, Abraham
Lincoln instructed Ulysses S. Grant, "Follow law, and forms of
law, as far as convenient." In a war zone, Lincoln
seemed to recognize, there may be some uncertainty in the
application of the law. Unfortunately, that uncertainty also
seems to apply to contractors' claims for the increased costs
of performance due to war-related risks. Cases seeking
recovery of those costs are, at best, a mixed bag. In a
previous post, we reported on Planate Management Group, LLC
v. United States, No. 17-1968C, 2018 U.S. Claims LEXIS
880, at *2 (Fed. Cl. July 27, 2018), and IAP Worldwide Servs.,
Inc., ASBCA Nos. 59397 et al., 17-1 BCA ¶ 36763 (May
17, 2017). In the former, the Court of Federal Claims held it
had jurisdiction over a contractor's claim that the costs of
arming its personnel when the security situation in Afghanistan
deteriorated constituted a cardinal change. In the latter,
the Armed Services Board of
