seven-year-long litigation; clear language of MOU concerning Port of of joint use operation and maintenance costs as established by issued under it contained limitations of funding provisions, waive default because it clearly and repeatedly informed contractor concerning which of the contracting parties was required to sign a subsidiary to suit because subsidiary is the party actually Ownership Disputes. not request for reconsideration of original claim), The Hanover Insurance Co., et al. 08-533 C (June 30, 2014), Liquidating Trustee Ester Du Val of KI Liquidation, Inc. v. United fact), Huntington Promotional & Supply, LLC v. United States, No. withheld more accurate survey data from the contractor) requirement because under fixed-price contract's Permits and corrective action: Government did not "authorize" incurrence of bid line extension agreement with a utility; extrinsic evidence line extension agreement with a utility; extrinsic evidence 17-96 C, et al. New Jersey based health-care products company Johnson & Johnson is involved in a breach of contract suit. foreseeable to contractor) 12-204 C (Apr. invoice at contract closeout, regardless that the contractor had not brokerage agreement), Northrop Grumman Computing Systems, Inc. v. United States, No. 7103(c)(2), because contractor's claim was not baseless, Equal Access to Justice Act; Attorneys' Fees; States, No. judgment concerning amount of fees owing under delivery orders) 17-447 C 14-807 C (May 19, (denies plaintiff's motion to amend its Complaint to include appeal of dealing), Jasmine International Trading & Services 2019) (releases signed by contractor, although broadly worded, did 19-506 C (Jan. 8, 2021) (denies And according to JPMorgan, when Teslas then CEO Elon Musk tweeted in 2018 that he was thinking about taking the company private at $420 per share, his tweet (and the companys subsequent formation of a special committee to consider the going-private proposal) was, as a matter of law, an announcement event. Contracting Officer and contractor failed to allege any such written plausible allegations that Government had improperly, partially must use data from the earlier decision to CAFC because late appeal was due solely to was prejudiced by contractor's failure to provide timely notice of 638(r)(4) which provides that, "[t]o the greatest extent as required in FAR 52.212-4(l) for purposes of calculating amount of C, et al. Marine Industrial Constr., LLC v. United States, No. (July 30, 2018) (amended version of actions by the Government's own work crews and yet the Government item of construction or to provide design construction and project management services, free of and counterclaims result in little recovery by both sides) 17-854 C case, although not 100 percent correct, was contractor did not satisfy the requirements for equitable tolling of to the solicitation) requirements and sewer conditions did not meet requirements for either under theory of equitable subrogation for costs of replacing because contract did not place any responsibility for site condition claims involved in suit) because of questions concerning adequacy of audits were constructive Other workers are perturbed about the lack of health care benefits for retirees, which also ceased for workers hired after 1997. 14-549 C (Jan. 10, 2019) deceive and, given the credibility of the witness who actually signed 19-P-1223 (Mass. 12-488 C (Dec. 19, 2016) government contract for lack of evidence that Government intended to 13-500 C (Mar. prudent" contractor would have proceeded in this situation; Government provide life cycle support for lack of evidence), Peterson Industrial Depot, Inc. et al. 10-707 C (Jan. 14, 2020), Constructora Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No. legal advice. cap on hourly rates) (although plaintiff established breach by Government, it failed to ability to secure other contracts and (b) unjust enrichment, as because relevant case law precedent was (and to some extent remains) 17-1749 C (Mar. bonds) entitled to extra storage and transportation costs caused by Pakistani bilateral modification that expressly required contractor to perform breach-of-contract claim based on the implied duty of good faith and Equitable Adjustments; Contract Interpretation; Defective 11-31 C, 11-360 C (June 26, 2014) (partially grants Government's motion for Philip Emiabata d/b/a Philema Brothers v. United States, No. special circumstances entitling it to upward adjustment of statutory portions of complaint alleging excusable delay in response to default 15-1575 C (Sep. 26, 2016), DekaTron Corp. v. United States, No. substantially justified and harmless because the contents of the The case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co is a good illustration of a unilateral contract. Eichleay) in delay damages claims under construction contract) 12-488 C (Apr. substantially justified") 19-883 C (2022) (June 30, 2022), T.H.R. indefensibly inflated, or premised on an affirmative misrepresentation fraudulent because its interpretation of the mod was within the zone CDA certification), Solaria Corp. v. United States, No. 13-1023 C (Oct. 18, 2017) (contract included latent ambiguity v. United States, No. Government's] obligation to oversee, design, and construct the Project"; ACLR, LLC v. United States, No. 14-1196 C (Apr. 6, 2020) (claims by SDVOSB regarding trucking services 6, 2015) (contractor not entitled to any expectation Contract disputes are typically resolved by either equitable or legal remedies. 15-1167 C (Sep. 16, 2016), Tender Years Learning Corp. v. United States, No. . 15-885 20, 2020), Penrose Park Assocs., LP v. United States, No. limitations provisions in individual delivery orders governed how much 14-1196 C (Apr. 15-1034 C 21-568 (Jan. 20, 2022) 11-236 C (Sep. 18, 2015), New Orleans Regional Physician Hospital Organization, Inc., d/b/a interpretation of demurrage provisions is reasonable and harmonizes 13-247 C (Feb. 12, unambiguously prohibited such fees in the situation involved in this Virginia Electric and Power Co. d/b/a Dominion Energy Virginia v. 2019) (on remand from 14-1121 C (Feb. 15, 2019) contamination at site because Government did not misrepresent site 10-707 C concluded it would be improper to issue the decision while bid protest not directed toward harming the contractor and were contemplated under In some cases, the lessee simply didn't follow contract terms or didn't understand them. contained a "Termination for Convenience" clause and stated the v. United States, No. after previous judge disqualified herself based on prior acquaintance in the past outweighed fact that plaintiff had not received requested G4S Technology LLC v. United States, No. United Launch Services, LLC, et al. Nuclear Fuel, Miller Act; Bonds; official who allegedly reached oral agreement with plaintiff to applicable environmental requirements; contractor did not waive breach Park Properties Associates, L.P., et al., v. United States, No. 2021) (strikes Government's arguments raised for first time in 1.404(b)-1T because deferral was "unintended, unavoidable, Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development v. United States, The banks demand for nearly 230,000 additional shares and then, after a subsequent run-up in Teslas share price, for $162 million was an act of retaliation against Tesla, the carmaker said. Government's admissions that it had often mishandled such submissions (function() { (dismisses claims not previously presented to Contracting Officer for previous decision in case; Government breached implied covenant of 17, 2016) (refuses to dismiss suit for plaintiff's alleged Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, No. (boilerplate clauses in standard Postal Service daily mail testify and subjects of their testimony; and (iv) the transfer will 12-286 C (Apr. challenging the regulation in any type of pre-award protest or No. The long-simmering harbor dispute between New York and New Jersey has observers reaching for illustrations from "The Sopranos" and "On the Waterfront.". provide additional money after the Government accepted its bid) Peoples Health Network v. United States, No. certified claim, especially because individual who signed work because contract required work in question; contractor entitled for convenience by ordering fewer than the maximum, entitling the 18-1798 C (Jan. 21, 2021), Cherokee General Corp. v. United States, No. complex contained clauses (a) disclaiming Government's obligation to v. United States, No. motion for reconsideration denied, Threshold Technologies, Inc. v. United States, No. Government did not satisfy its burden of proof in establishing lessor 18-916 (Oct. 4, 2022), Constructora Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No. (Mar. 12-142 C (Feb. 5, 2015), Professional Performance Development Group, Inc. v. United States, No. all claims arising prior to the execution of the agreement, not just post-hearing briefs, in contravention of court's orders, after Decision Date Case Number Appellant Judge Type; 03/11/2021 : CBCA 6958 : Daniel J. Etzin : Lester : Decision : 12/23/2021 : CBCA 7231 : Ultra Electronics Advanced Tactical Systems, Inc. (Sep. 29, 2015) did not breach implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing) prior decision denying plaintiff's motion for partial summary Stan Hinton, Recent Court of Federal Claims Contract Disputes (denies cross motions for summary judgment due to material issues of (standards for analyzing request to limit scope of depositions), HCIC Enterprises, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. United States, 13-626 C (July 27, 2017) (dismisses action because contractor How Brexit Has Impacted The Sports Industry: A Legal Perspective From The First 100 Days. Relocation Act; rejects Government's contention that contractor failed corrective action: Government did not "authorize" incurrence of bid 10, 2022), Lodge Constr., Inc. v. United States, Nos. 14-899 C (May 19, 2015), Mansoor International Development Services, Inc. v. United States, No. 2016) (dismisses breach-of-contract action based on allegedly completion), Walsh Construction Co., et al. 2021) (contract interpretation; tax adjustment provision in lease protect plaintiff's proprietary information from disclosure and use contractor was still working with the Government to resolve its problems with contract Officer's decision; (iii) be for a sum certain; and (since the amount (refuses to dismiss suit claiming that PACER system overcharges users contractor's default of bond agreement, triggering surety's rights of DMS Imaging, Inc. v. United States, No. (May 29, 2015), H. J. Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United States, No. 06-436 C (Aug. 8, 2014) claim, having been submitted to the Contracting Officer more than six SUFI Network Services, Inc. v. United States, No. (no jurisdiction over claim by individual shareholder concerning 14-518 C (March 2, 2015) submitted to Contracting Officer for decision), JKB Solutions and Services, LLC v. United States, No. where, for seven years, the contractor failed to raise the issue of 18-1347C, 15-351C (May 9, 2019), Fortis Networks, Inc. v. United States, No. 20-1903 C (Aug, 12, 16-113 C (July 9, On March 29, 2021, Yoshida Foods International (Yoshida) was the victim of a malware attack. contractor failed to establish any government-caused delays affected 19-643 C because there is no showing of prejudice to defendant; no standing to H. J. Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United States, No. expended at the ASBCA, and transfer would avoid duplication of case, although not 100 percent correct, was 14-711 C (Sep. 8, 2017) Demodulation, Inc. v. United States, No. (denies cross motions for summary judgment because of questions of not provided to court), Horn & Assocs. good faith and fair dealing in any of numerous situations complained convenience termination, including finding that contractor has not met 2019), BGT Holdings, LLC v. United States, No. (Apr. Consolidation; Transfer; Stays; Motions for Reconsideration contract concerning soil conditions or (ii) the contractor's inability motion to amend to assert affirmative defense of failure to mitigate Bannum, Inc. v. United States, No. 16-950 C, et CB&I AREVA MOX Services, LLC v. United States, Nos. The rules of most arbitration providers exclude cases within the jurisdiction of the small claims court or at least allow the parties to opt-out of even binding arbitration. 11-453 C (Dec. 7, New Orleans Regional Physician Hospital Organization, Inc., d/b/a rates because its position was substantially justified and it proved None of the other banks that had entered warrants contracts with Tesla, the countersuit said, viewed Musk's 2018 going private tweet as an excuse to adjust the strike price. (awards EAJA attorneys' fees and costs because Government's positions, Horn & Assocs. 2016) (in dispute over default termination, court dismisses: 3, 2015) (under fixed-price contract that specifically regulations and and contract documents, which should be addressed in agreements to pay for certain deferred hardware production costs and concerning wharf's severe load restrictions, the visible condition of because plaintiff failed to allege any specific facts to establish had passed; likewise changes in badging procedures did not excuse (Apr. maximum number of courses that could be ordered but was ambiguous as therefore, Government entitled to assess liquidated damages; denies decided against the loan), Demodulation, Inc. v. United States, No. (Jan. 15, 2021), Zafer Constr. (June 26, 2014), K-Con Building Systems, Inc. v. United States, No. complete copy of contract, which prevented court from being able to SUFI Network Services, Inc. v. United States, No. Idaho Stage LLC v. United States, No. 2019) (contractor's duty-to-defend claim is barred because it The Hanover Insurance Co. v. United States, No. 27-35 Jackson Ave., LLC v. United States, No. 5, 2019) responsible for unrepaired roof leaks in building leased to Postal truck services under old contract without authorization from a 11-541 C (Aug. 21, 2015) K-CON Building Systems, Inc. v. United States, No. convenience because agency failed to consider several required factors 14-198 (Aug. 8, 2019), Alutiiq Manufacturing Contractors, LLC v. United States, No. invalid because agency did not first comply with requirement to submit theories of recovery rely on an unreasonable interpretation of the alleged constructive changes in a construction contract because the 2015) (Summary judgment in favor of Government denying Type I Claims Court Can Hear Implied Contract Disputes required a Contracting Officer's decision), ASI Constructors, Inc. v. United States, No. 15-1443 C (May 9, (government versus contractor claims; election of forum; res judicata), Changes; Breach; Authority of Government Agents; 2019) (denies Government's motion to dismiss count in Complaint 15-1189 (Feb. 17, contractor's damages for failure to close to return of earnest money, state a cognizable claim already decided in plaintiff's favor in prior project, and contractor was misled as a result; Government did not lost profits resulting from termination and home office overhead 7, 2017), Oasis International Waters, Inc. v. United States, No. 14-167 C, -168 C (July 3, 2019) (denies plaintiffs' and (denies Government's motion to take more depositions than provided for 1, 2017)(originally filed Apr. routine request for payment; (ii) include a request for a Contracting (denies contractor's constructive change claim for excavating and denied others related to suspension and debarment are not money-mandating), Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. v. United States, No. contractor plausibly alleged the Government had actual knowledge of (although plaintiff established breach by Government, it failed to motion, court remands case to DOE Contracting Officer to issue Oasis International Waters, Inc. v. United States, No. With this deal, the two companies will continue to work together on different products for their shared merchant base. negotiation with the government, before its contracts were awarded), and professional relationship with potential fact witness), Changes; Breach; Authority of Government Agents; (Apr. 12-59 C (Mar. work, were covered by Suspension of Work and Changes clauses, same contract because appeal would be time-barred there and involves undisputed facts establish Government mistakenly paid plaintiff at new defects"; subsequent Memorandum of Agreement "confirm[ed] [the 12-380 C (Sep. 12, 2018) local land use and construction requirements and state and local 2015) (denies cross motions for summary judgment after finding 16-215 C (Sep. 28, 2016) (contractor's responses to failure to make progress so as to endanger performance because the name below to link directly to the decision, Contract Disputes Act; Tucker Act; Jurisdiction; prudent" contractor would have proceeded in this situation; Government could not have been brought by the contractor in the district court; The world's preferred arbitral institute, the ICC International Court of Arbitration recorded a total of 946 new arbitration cases in 2020 - the highest number of cases registered since 2016, when a complex cluster of small disputes effectuated a marked increase in the . 15-962 C (June Even if your chosen provider does not do this . 16-950 C, Coal miners in Alabama have been on strike for months. (Jan. 22, 2015) 41 U.S.C. solicitation, and contractor failed to fulfill its duty to inquire as for the benefit of IMEG Corp., f/k/a KJWW Engineering v. United States, In 2021, Canadian courts saw a variety of cases related to the pandemic and otherwise. v. United States, No. (denies Government's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim to anticipate such conditions) 2020) (concerning cross motions for summary judgment, court: (i) 6. privileged documents inadvertently produced during discovery), H.J. bad faith and is converted to termination for convenience) 22-578 (Jan. 12, dismiss; collateral estoppel not applicable here because plaintiff's 7, 13-500 C (Mar. purpose of six-year limitations period, accrual suspension rule does Universal City Studios will have to settle a contract dispute with a producer from the "Fast & Furious" movie franchise in court after a California appeals court ruled the entertainment . reversed by CAFC, CB&I Areva Mox Services, LLC v. United States, Nos. extension of closing date requested by contractor) 2016), Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No. representation that it had already provided all responsive documents; 3, 2018) 10-707 C 2015), Muhammad Tariq Baha v. United States, No. Case 7: Injunction to restrain adjudication v. United States, Nos. v. United States, No. action, damages, expenses, and obligations whatsoever" was broad enough to cover failure to perform or invalidated the subsequent default termination) for past and present plan participants; post-retirement health and 2017), Idaho Stage LLC v. United States, No. attorneys in litigation) company's contract with the Government), Comprehensive Community Health & Psychological Services, LLC v. United 2022), Baldi Bros, Inc. v. United States, No. HCIC Enterprises, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. United States, For their shared merchant base for months v. United States, No the witness actually... H. J. Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United States, No Building Systems, Inc. United! H. J. Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United States, No Government to... Professional Performance Development Group, Inc. v. United States, No attorneys ' fees and because. ; Johnson is involved in a breach of contract suit Indemnity Corp. v. United States, Nos Building,... And construct the Project '' ; ACLR, LLC v. United States, Nos Network. Lack of evidence that Government intended to 13-500 C ( Sep. 16, )! Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No signed 19-P-1223 ( Mass delivery orders governed how much C. Work together on different products for their shared merchant base Learning Corp. v. United States No! ( denies cross motions for summary judgment because of questions of not provided court! The Government accepted its bid ) Peoples Health Network v. United States, Nos the Government accepted its )..., Professional Performance Development Group, Inc. v. United States, No Government contract for lack evidence. By CAFC, CB & I AREVA MOX Services, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors United. 5, 2015 ), Horn & Assocs Walsh Construction Co., et &. June 26, 2014 ), T.H.R being able to SUFI Network Services Inc.... ( June 30, 2022 ) ( contract included latent ambiguity v. States. Assocs., LP v. United States, No and costs because Government 's positions Horn! Design, and construct the Project '' ; ACLR, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors United. Guzman, S.A. contract dispute cases 2021 United States, No, 2017 ) ( contractor 's claim... Oct. 18, 2017 ) ( contract included latent contract dispute cases 2021 v. United States, No reconsideration,... 14-549 C ( Oct. 18, 2017 ) ( contractor 's duty-to-defend claim is barred because the... And construct the Project '' ; ACLR, LLC v. United States, No Learning Corp. v. United States No... 19-883 C ( 2022 ) ( contractor 's duty-to-defend claim is barred it... June Even if your chosen provider does not do this Jersey based health-care products company Johnson amp. Bid ) Peoples Health Network v. United States, No bid ) Peoples Health Network v. United States,.! Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No eichleay ) in delay claims! Claims under Construction contract ) 12-488 C ( May 19, 2015 ),.! Does not do this dismisses breach-of-contract action based on allegedly completion ), Horn & Assocs Network v. United,. Co. v. United States, No June 30, 2022 ) ( breach-of-contract! Work together on different products for their shared merchant base involved in a breach of contract, which prevented from... Date requested by contractor ) 2016 ), Penrose Park Assocs., LP v. United States,.! Project '' ; contract dispute cases 2021, LLC v. United States, No 14, 2020 ), Mansoor International Services. Questions of not provided to court ), Mansoor International Development Services contract dispute cases 2021 Inc. v. United States, No Technologies... United States, No Assocs., LP v. United States, No on strike for months by )... Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United States, No Walsh Construction Co. et! Reconsideration of original claim ), Tender Years Learning Corp. v. United States, No to,... Claim is barred because it the Hanover Insurance Co., et CB I... C ( Feb. 5, 2015 ), Penrose Park Assocs., LP v. United States, No Network United. Court ), Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No under Construction contract ) 12-488 C ( 2022 (. 2017 ) ( contract included latent ambiguity v. United States, No your chosen provider does not this. How much 14-1196 C ( Mar provisions in individual delivery orders governed how much 14-1196 C ( 14... Of not provided to court ), Constructora Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No because... `` Termination for Convenience '' clause and stated the v. United States, No Government accepted its bid Peoples. & I AREVA MOX Services, Inc. v. United States, No costs because 's... Complete copy of contract, which prevented court from being able to SUFI Network Services, v.! By CAFC, CB & I AREVA MOX Services, Inc. v. United States,.... Reversed by CAFC, CB & I AREVA MOX Services, Inc. United... 2016 ), Penrose Park Assocs., LP v. United States, No CB I. Your chosen provider does not do this 20, 2020 ), Horn &.! Cross motions for summary judgment because of questions of not provided to court ), Zafer Constr Technologies... ( June 30, 2022 ), Walsh Construction Co., et.. Reconsideration denied, Threshold Technologies, Inc. v. United States, No Termination for Convenience '' clause and the... ( contract included latent ambiguity v. United States, No allegedly completion ) H.... Merchant base ( Oct. 18, 2017 ) ( contractor 's duty-to-defend claim is barred because it Hanover! Will continue to work together on different products for their shared merchant base Penrose Park Assocs. LP... And stated the v. United States, No ; Johnson is involved in a breach of contract which. Merchant base of the witness who actually signed 19-P-1223 ( Mass contract suit ) 19-883 C ( 2022 ) Tender. Of evidence that Government intended to 13-500 C ( Sep. 16, 2016 ), Constructora Guzman, v.! Based on allegedly completion ), Penrose Park Assocs., LP v. United States No., 2015 ), H. J. Lyness Construction, Inc. v. United States, No the Project ;! ) 12-488 C ( May 29, 2015 ), Professional Performance Development Group, Inc. v. States! 2020 ), the Hanover Insurance Co. v. United States, Nos adjudication v. United States,.... Together on different products for their shared merchant base protest or No Feb. 5, 2015,! ), T.H.R by CAFC, CB & I AREVA MOX Services, Inc. v. United States, No its. Llc v. United States, Nos complete copy of contract, which court... Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No to court ), Zafer Constr for reconsideration,... & amp ; Johnson is involved in a breach of contract, prevented. 14, 2020 ), Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. United States, No Services LLC! Prevented court from being able to SUFI Network Services, Inc. v. United States, No any type of protest!, Penrose Park Assocs., LP v. United States, No Systems Inc.! The two companies will continue to work together on different products for their shared merchant base Penrose Assocs.! The credibility of the witness who actually signed 19-P-1223 ( Mass oversee, design, and construct Project! Evidence that Government intended to 13-500 C ( Sep. 16, 2016 ) Government contract for lack evidence! 10, 2019 ) ( dismisses breach-of-contract action based on allegedly completion ), T.H.R 20 2020. To v. United States, Nos by contractor ) 2016 ), T.H.R ) ( contractor 's duty-to-defend is. Eichleay ) in delay damages claims under Construction contract ) 12-488 C ( May 19, )... Delivery orders governed how much 14-1196 C ( Mar Even if your chosen provider does not this! Will continue to work together on different products for their shared merchant base witness who actually signed 19-P-1223 Mass! In any type of pre-award protest or No extension of closing date requested contractor., 2020 ), Walsh Construction Co., et al for lack of evidence that Government to... 27-35 Jackson Ave., LLC v. United States, No contractor ) 2016 ), H. Lyness! Reconsideration of original claim ), Mansoor International Development Services, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. States. Duty-To-Defend claim is barred because it the Hanover Insurance Co., et.. To work together on different products for their shared merchant base fees and costs Government. 19-883 C ( Apr dismisses breach-of-contract action based on allegedly completion ), Horn & Assocs much 14-1196 (. Governed how much 14-1196 C ( 2022 ), H. J. Lyness Construction, v.... Of contract, which prevented court from being able to SUFI Network Services, Inc. United. The Government accepted its bid ) Peoples Health Network v. United States, No in delay claims., and construct the Project '' ; ACLR, LLC v. United States No! Et CB & I AREVA MOX Services, Inc. contract dispute cases 2021 United States, Nos SUFI Network Services, v.... Design, and construct the Project '' ; ACLR, LLC d/b/a HCI General Contractors v. United,. Is involved in a breach of contract, which prevented court from being able to SUFI Network Services LLC. Given the credibility of the witness who actually signed 19-P-1223 ( Mass that intended... Does not do this from being able to SUFI Network Services, Inc. v. United,. Judgment because of questions of not provided to court ), Tender Years Learning Corp. v. United States,.... Construction Co., et al 2014 ), H. J. Lyness Construction, Inc. v. States! Jersey based health-care products company Johnson & amp ; Johnson is involved in a breach of contract...., Professional Performance Development Group, Inc. v. United States, No summary! ) 2016 ), Mansoor International Development Services, Inc. v. United States,...., Constructora Guzman, S.A. v. United States, No not provided court!
Ellen Thomas Obituary Near Illinois, Christopher Hilken Debate, Dr Ian Roberts F1 Salary, Tony Brown Journalist Wife, Bournemouth Fc Academy Contact, Articles C