Federal Court GuidesBid Protests & Claims › Tucker Act claims
Government contracts

The waiver that lets you sue the sovereign

The United States consents to money suits through the Tucker Act — contracts, takings, illegal exaction, money-mandating statutes — heard in the Court of Federal Claims. The consent has edges, and cases die on them more than on merits.

Discuss your caseCall (202) 999-3631Direct line to the firm — no intake bots. Email info@dcfederallitigation.com if you prefer to write.

What fits inside the waiver

The edges that eat cases

Six years from accrual, strictly kept (six-year limit, 28 U.S.C. § 2501); sounding-in-tort claims excluded; equitable relief mostly unavailable; and for contract disputes under the CDA, the claims process must run first — a certified claim and a contracting officer's decision are the courthouse's admission ticket. Mapping a dispute onto the right theory before the clock runs is the actual first task.

Questions people actually ask

Can we get an injunction under the Tucker Act?

The court's equitable powers are narrow — money is the remedy, with limited exceptions in protest and certain contract contexts. Cases needing conduct stopped usually need a different vehicle, chosen early.

Does the six-year clock pause while we negotiate?

Accrual and tolling doctrines are stingy — negotiation rarely stops the clock. File-preserving strategies exist; assuming goodwill extends deadlines is how meritorious claims die.

Small claim, big principle — is there a lighter path?

Smaller contract disputes can ride agency boards of contract appeals instead of COFC — cheaper, faster, binding. Forum choice under the CDA is an election with consequences; make it deliberately.