1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |CFC Rejects Taxes Clause as Basis for Recovering Environmental Remediation Costs

CFC Rejects Taxes Clause as Basis for Recovering Environmental Remediation Costs

Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.25.13

On January 13, the Court of Federal Claims in Shell Oil Co. v. U.S. held (1) the government was not liable for CERCLA environmental cleanup costs under the "Taxes" clause in certain World War II-era contracts; and (2) even if the "Taxes" clause had provided for indemnification, any indemnification rights were not preserved after contract termination. The "Taxes" clause and the absence of a reservation of rights to pursue indemnification in Shell is in contrast with the explicit "hold harmless" clauses in the facilities contracts cases in which the contractor reserved its rights to pursue indemnification (Ford and DuPont) and indemnification clauses authorized under Public Law 85-804, which contain explicit post-contract termination provisions.


Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.30.25

Are All Baby Products Related? TTAB Says “No”

The United States Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB or Board) recently issued a refreshed opinion in the trademark dispute Naterra International, Inc. v. Samah Bensalem, where Naterra International, Inc. petitioned the TTAB to cancel Samah Bensalem’s registration for the mark BABIES' MAGIC TEA based on its own BABY MAGIC mark. On remand from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the TTAB reconsidered an expert’s opinion about relatedness of goods based on the concept of “umbrella branding” and found that the goods are unrelated and therefore again denied the petition for cancellation....