Reading Comprehension

PT5 · S4 · P1 · Q5 Government Contracts

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Governments of developing countries occasionally enter into economic development agreements with foreign investors who provide capital and technological expertise that may not be readily available in such countries.

Topic

Are host governments in developing countries allowed to unilaterally change or terminate development contracts with foreign investors under "general principles of law"?

Framework

Challenge Position

Main Point

The claim that governments inherently have the power to unilaterally modify or terminate development contracts under "general principles of law" (based on French administrative contract theory) is flawed, since the power is not universally recognized and is much more limited than suggested. (The clearest encapsulation is at the end of P1: and supported in the following paragraphs.)

P1: Risks of Development Agreements and the Government "Inherent Power" Argument

Developing countries sometimes offer legal protections to foreign investors to make agreements more secure, but some argue their governments still have an inherent right to change or cancel contracts (based on French administrative law). The author says this claim is flawed for two reasons.

P2: Limits and Rules of the French Administrative Contract Theory

Not every French government contract is an "administrative contract." There are clear criteria for such contracts, and when the government changes terms, it must compensate the contractor—so it doesn't have unlimited power to just change financial aspects of the deal.

P3: French Law’s Limited Relevance & Practices in Other Countries

French administrative contract law isn't a universal principle—countries like the US and UK don’t use it; there, the government can only change or end contracts if that power is spelled out in the contract itself. The fact that contracts often include such clauses actually proves that this is not an automatic, inherent power.

5.

It can be inferred from the passage that under the “ordinary law of contracts” (third paragraph), a government would have the right to modify unilaterally the terms of a contract that it had entered into with a foreign investor if which one of the following were true?

  1. The government undertook a greater

    Trap

    1% picked this

  2. The cost to the foreign

    Trap

    1% picked this

  3. The modification of the contract

    Trap

    1% picked this

  4. Both the government and the

    Trap

    1% picked this

  5. Correct

    The contract contains a specific

    Why this is right

    Answer E is correct.

    Skill tested: Inference · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

    96% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free