Scientific Games International, Inc. v. Commonwealth
620 Pa. 175
| Pa. | 2013Background
- Procurement Code governs Commonwealth procurement; DGS acts as purchasing agent; competitive sealed proposals are available under certain conditions.
- Code provides protest procedures culminating in Commonwealth Court review, with Board of Claims having exclusive jurisdiction over contract-based claims.
- Section 521 allows cancellation of solicitations; protest rights are limited to those not canceling per §521.
- In 2010-2011 SGI and GTECH bid on a slot-machine control system; SGI selected, contract negotiations ensued, and cover documents were electronically signed though some approvals were pending.
- DGS canceled the RFP per §521 in Aug 2011; SGI sought declaratory and injunctive relief in Commonwealth Court, arguing Section 521 violation and nonmonetary relief.
- Lower Commonwealth Court ruled on jurisdictional questions; this Court reviews whether exclusive Board of Claims or sovereign-immunity limitations preclude Commonwealth Court action.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §1724(d) allows nonmonetary relief in Commonwealth Court. | SGI asserts §1724(d) preserves nonmonetary relief in other forums, enabling Commonwealth Court jurisdiction. | Appellants contend §1724(d) does not establish broader jurisdiction; sovereign immunity and Board of Claims exclusive jurisdiction apply. | §1724(d) does not broaden nonmonetary relief beyond specific waivers; Commonwealth Court jurisdiction rejected. |
| Whether sovereign immunity bars nonmonetary relief in this context. | SGI argues sovereign-immunity waiver via §1702(b) and §1724(d) allows nonmonetary relief. | Appellants argue immunity remains except for express waivers, which §1724(d) does not provide for this case. | Nonmonetary relief against the Commonwealth not permitted absent express waiver; Board of Claims exclusive for contract-type claims. |
| Whether cancellations under §521 are protest grounds or contract claims in disguise. | SGI frames as statutory violation of §521 needing Commonwealth Court review. | Cancellations are immune from protests; §521 remedies are limited to contract execution contexts, not challenges in Commonwealth Court. | Cancellations fall outside protest rights; no remedy in Commonwealth Court absent express waiver. |
| Whether equitable relief (specific performance) is available against the Commonwealth here. | SGI seeks nonmonetary relief potentially including specific performance of a contract. | Specific performance generally not available against the Commonwealth; equity cannot override sovereign immunity. | Specific performance not available; equity cannot bypass exclusive Board of Claims under sovereign-immunity framework. |
| Whether SGI’s claims are contract-based or statutory; governing forum. | SGI characterizes as statutory §521 violation, not contract claim, preserving Commonwealth Court jurisdiction. | Claims arise from contract execution and fall within Board of Claims exclusive jurisdiction. | Remedies for procurement disputes reside in Board of Claims; Commonwealth Court lacks jurisdiction here. |
Key Cases Cited
- Shovel Transfer & Storage, Inc. v. Simpson, 523 Pa. 235 (1989) (Board of Claims exclusive jurisdiction over contract-based claims against Commonwealth)
- XPress Truck Lines, Inc. v. PLCB, 503 Pa. 399 (1983) (specific performance generally not available against the Commonwealth; Board of Claims scope)
- Keenheel v. Commonwealth, 523 Pa. 223 (1989) (jurisdictional predicate requires reliance on contract provisions)
- New Foundations, Inc. v. DGS, 893 A.2d 826 (Pa.Cmwlth.2005) (sec 1724(d) construed to preserve other statutorily provided remedies; not broad waiver)
- Hanover Insurance Co. v. SWIF, 35 A.3d 849 (Pa.Cmwlth.2012) (en banc decision addressing Board of Claims scope under Procurement Code)
- Tri-State Asphalt Corp. v. PennDOT, 582 A.2d 55 (Pa.Cmwlth.1990) (jurisdictional implications of exclusive Board of Claims over contract actions)
- GTECH Corp. v. Department of Revenue, 965 A.2d 1276 (Pa.Cmwlth.2009) (contract-related sovereign-immunity considerations in procurement context)