ELR Citation: 43 ELR 20101
No(s). 12-79 (Fed. Cl. Apr 26, 2013) (Block, J.)

The Federal Claims Court held that §1603(a) of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009, which requires partial reimbursement for certain "energy property," does not give rise to a claim for consequential damages resulting from the denial of such reimbursement. After the U.S. Treasury denied its request for reimbursement under §1603(a), a developer of biodiesel platforms filed suit to recover the amount of the grants, as well as "consequential damages" that arose as a result of the government's denial. The court has previously held that §1603(a) was a money-mandating statute that could give rise to a claim under the Tucker Act. But because consequential damages are not included within the compensation §1603(a) mandates, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act cannot serve as the source of substantive law required for the court to exercise jurisdiction over claims for consequential damages. It therefore dismissed the developer's claims for consequential damages.