# What Are the Legal Consequences for an Owner Who Breaches the Implied Duty of Fairness in an Rfp Process? ▴ Question

**Published:** 2025-08-10
**Categories:** Question

---

![Abstract geometric forms converge around a central RFQ protocol engine, symbolizing institutional digital asset derivatives trading. Transparent elements represent real-time market data and algorithmic execution paths, while solid panels denote principal liquidity and robust counterparty relationships](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-protocol-core-for-high-fidelity-execution.jpg)

![A precise system balances components: an Intelligence Layer sphere on a Multi-Leg Spread bar, pivoted by a Private Quotation sphere atop a Prime RFQ dome. A Digital Asset Derivative sphere floats, embodying Implied Volatility and Dark Liquidity within Market Microstructure](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-protocols-high-fidelity-execution-7.jpg)

## Concept

The request for proposal (RFP) process represents a complex system of communication and evaluation, governed by protocols that extend beyond the explicit text of the documents. At its core, the system’s integrity relies on a foundational principle ▴ the [implied duty of fairness](https://prime.greeks.live/area/implied-duty-of-fairness/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite). This duty functions as a binding operational protocol that arises the moment an owner issues an RFP that is structured to be more than a simple invitation for negotiations. The legal system, particularly through a framework known as the “[Contract A](https://prime.greeks.live/area/contract-a/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite) / Contract B” analysis, provides the architecture for this obligation.

When a bidder submits a compliant proposal in response to such an RFP, a preliminary process contract, “Contract A,” is formed. This initial contract’s essential term is the owner’s promise to conduct a fair and equal evaluation of all compliant submissions. The ultimate prize, the final performance agreement, is designated “[Contract B](https://prime.greeks.live/area/contract-b/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite).”

A breach of the implied duty of fairness is, therefore, a failure within the “Contract A” system. It is a deviation from the established protocol that compromises the integrity of the entire [procurement process](https://prime.greeks.live/question/what-are-the-primary-legal-differences-between-a-tender-process-and-an-rfp-process-in-public-sector-procurement/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite). This duty is not a vague ethical guideline; it is a legally enforceable obligation that binds the owner to the evaluation criteria and procedures articulated in the [RFP documents](https://prime.greeks.live/area/rfp-documents/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite). The existence of this duty is contingent upon the design of the RFP itself.

If the document’s language indicates an intent to create a binding competition with defined rules, leading to the award of a contract, courts are likely to infer the formation of “Contract A.” Conversely, an RFP explicitly framed as a non-binding request for information or a precursor to open-ended negotiations may fail to trigger this legal framework. The very structure of the solicitation dictates the legal relationships and obligations that govern the participants.

> The legal framework of “Contract A” establishes an implied duty of fairness as a binding protocol governing the RFP evaluation process.

![A sleek, illuminated control knob emerges from a robust, metallic base, representing a Prime RFQ interface for institutional digital asset derivatives. Its glowing bands signify real-time analytics and high-fidelity execution of RFQ protocols, enabling optimal price discovery and capital efficiency in dark pools for block trades](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-system-for-optimal-execution.jpg)

## The Genesis of Obligation in Procurement

The formation of “Contract A” is the critical event that activates the duty of fairness. This process contract materializes when a bidder submits a bid that conforms to the requirements stipulated in the RFP. This action constitutes acceptance of the owner’s offer to engage in a fair competition. The terms of “Contract A” are the rules of that competition, as defined by the owner in the RFP documents.

These rules include, but are not limited to, the submission deadline, the format of the proposal, and, most critically, the criteria against which submissions will be judged. The owner, by designing the competition, implicitly agrees to abide by their own rules.

This legal structure ensures that the procurement process is orderly and transparent. Without the “Contract A” framework, an RFP could be a chaotic and unpredictable exercise, deterring qualified firms from investing the significant resources required to prepare a serious proposal. The implied duty of fairness provides bidders with a degree of assurance that their investment will be subject to a good-faith evaluation based on the disclosed merits. It transforms the process from a mere solicitation of interest into a structured, competitive system with clear operational parameters and legal recourse for procedural failures.

![A metallic blade signifies high-fidelity execution and smart order routing, piercing a complex Prime RFQ orb. Within, market microstructure, algorithmic trading, and liquidity pools are visualized](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-prime-os-execution-precision.jpg)

## Defining the Boundaries of Fairness

The scope of the duty of fairness is defined by the RFP’s own terms and the reasonable expectations of the participants. Courts have identified several common actions that constitute a breach of this duty. These actions represent a malfunction in the evaluation machinery, undermining the principle of equitable treatment for all compliant bidders.

- **Accepting a [Materially Non-Compliant Bid](https://prime.greeks.live/area/materially-non-compliant-bid/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite)** ▴ This occurs when an owner accepts a proposal that fails to meet an essential requirement of the RFP. A defect is considered material if it pertains to a critical aspect of the project and its omission would likely have been significant in the owner’s deliberations. Allowing such a bid to proceed provides its proponent an unfair advantage and fundamentally alters the basis of the competition.

- **Undisclosed Evaluation Criteria** ▴ The owner’s evaluation must be based solely on the criteria specified in the RFP. Introducing new, secret, or weighted criteria during the evaluation process corrupts the system’s integrity. Bidders calibrate their proposals to the stated requirements; evaluating them on a different basis is a fundamental breach of the “Contract A” protocol.

- **Bias or Favoritism** ▴ The evaluation process must be conducted impartially. Any evidence that the evaluation committee was biased towards one bidder, or that a decision was made for reasons outside the proposal’s merits, can invalidate the outcome. This includes conflicts of interest or preferential treatment that skews the results.

- **[Bid Shopping](https://prime.greeks.live/area/bid-shopping/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite)** ▴ This practice involves the owner using the pricing or technical solutions from one bidder’s proposal to negotiate a better deal with another bidder. It violates the confidentiality of the submissions and undermines the competitive process by treating proposals as leverage rather than as distinct offers within the competition.

For public entities, the duty of fairness is often reinforced by principles of administrative law, which impose a standard of [procedural fairness](https://prime.greeks.live/area/procedural-fairness/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite) on governmental decision-making. This can create an even more stringent set of obligations, where the process must be seen to be fair and transparent to maintain public trust. The analysis in such cases often involves the five Baker factors, which consider the nature of the decision, the statutory scheme, the importance of the interest at stake, the legitimate expectations of the parties, and the procedural choices available to the decision-maker. 

![An institutional-grade platform's RFQ protocol interface, with a price discovery engine and precision guides, enables high-fidelity execution for digital asset derivatives. Integrated controls optimize market microstructure and liquidity aggregation within a Principal's operational framework](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/proprietary-institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-protocol-engine-facilitating-high-fidelity-execution-and-granular-market-microstructure-analysis-for-prime-os.jpg)

![Precision metallic mechanism with a central translucent sphere, embodying institutional RFQ protocols for digital asset derivatives. This core represents high-fidelity execution within a Prime RFQ, optimizing price discovery and liquidity aggregation for block trades, ensuring capital efficiency and atomic settlement](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-prime-os-execution-hub.jpg)

## Strategy

Navigating the legal terrain of an RFP requires a strategic understanding of the forces at play. For a bidder who perceives a breach of fairness, the strategy centers on demonstrating a systemic failure in the “Contract A” process. For the owner, the counter-strategy involves defending the integrity of the procurement system they designed and executed.

The entire conflict unfolds within the architecture of the RFP documents and the legal precedents that govern them. The effectiveness of either party’s position depends on its ability to marshal evidence and construct a compelling argument about the intended function and actual operation of the procurement process.

A bidder’s primary strategic objective is to prove that a breach occurred and that the breach was material to the outcome. This involves a forensic analysis of the RFP, the submitted proposals, and the owner’s evaluation records. The bidder must establish that a “Contract A” existed, that the owner deviated from its terms, and that this deviation caused the bidder to suffer damages. The owner’s strategy is to dismantle this chain of causation.

They may argue that no “Contract A” was ever formed, that any deviation was immaterial and within their discretion, or that a well-drafted exclusion clause shields them from liability. The contest is one of interpretation, where the language of the RFP documents becomes the central battleground.

![A precision institutional interface features a vertical display, control knobs, and a sharp element. This RFQ Protocol system ensures High-Fidelity Execution and optimal Price Discovery, facilitating Liquidity Aggregation](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-execution-platform-interface.jpg)

## Offensive Maneuvers for Aggrieved Bidders

An aggrieved bidder must meticulously build a case that exposes a flaw in the owner’s procurement system. The initial step is to secure the existence of “Contract A” by highlighting the formal, structured nature of the RFP. Subsequently, the focus shifts to the breach itself.

The bidder must demonstrate that the owner failed to follow its own rules in a way that mattered. For instance, proving that a winning bid was non-compliant requires a two-pronged attack ▴ first, identifying the specific RFP requirement that was violated, and second, arguing that this requirement was an essential component of the project, not a minor technicality.

Another powerful strategy is to challenge the evaluation process itself. If a bidder can obtain evidence, through disclosure or other means, that the scoring was arbitrary, inconsistent, or based on undisclosed criteria, they can directly attack the legitimacy of the outcome. This approach questions the very heart of the owner’s duty ▴ the promise to conduct a fair evaluation.

The goal is to show that the system was either poorly designed or improperly operated, leading to a skewed and indefensible result. Success hinges on transforming a suspicion of unfairness into a documented, provable systemic failure.

![Abstract forms depict interconnected institutional liquidity pools and intricate market microstructure. Sharp algorithmic execution paths traverse smooth aggregated inquiry surfaces, symbolizing high-fidelity execution within a Principal's operational framework](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-execution-microstructure-prime-os-1.jpg)

## Defensive Protocols for Owners

Owners are not without powerful defensive systems. The most potent of these is the [exclusion of liability clause](https://prime.greeks.live/area/exclusion-of-liability-clause/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite). Modern RFPs often contain carefully worded clauses designed to limit or eliminate the owner’s liability for any claims arising from the procurement process, including allegations of unfairness. Courts have shown a willingness to enforce these clauses, provided they are clear and unambiguous and do not contravene some overriding public policy.

The strategic deployment of such a clause can act as a firewall, insulating the owner from damages even if procedural missteps are proven. The enforceability of these clauses is often assessed using the three-part [Tercon test](https://prime.greeks.live/area/tercon-test/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite), which examines the clause’s application to the circumstances, its unconscionability, and any overriding public policy reasons to set it aside.

> An owner’s most effective defense often lies within the architecture of the RFP itself, particularly through a robustly drafted exclusion of liability clause.

Beyond this firewall, an owner can argue that the RFP was intentionally designed to avoid creating a “Contract A.” By using language that emphasizes negotiation, collaboration, and the owner’s unfettered discretion, the owner can frame the RFP as a non-binding solicitation, thereby dissolving the legal foundation for an implied duty of fairness. Furthermore, if a deviation in the winning bid is identified, the owner can strategically classify it as an “immaterial” defect, arguing that the owner’s discretionary power, granted by the RFP documents, allowed them to waive such minor irregularities in the interest of securing the best overall value.

### Bid Compliance Analysis Matrix

| Compliance Characteristic | Compliant Bid Feature (Supports Bidder’s Case) | Non-Compliant Feature (Supports Owner’s Discretion) | Strategic Implication |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Submission Deadline | Submitted before the exact time and date specified. | Submitted moments after the deadline due to a verifiable external issue. | Strict adherence is a hallmark of materiality. Any leniency by the owner for one bidder can be framed as unfairness. |
| Mandatory Technical Specs | Includes all required components and meets or exceeds performance metrics. | Substitutes a component with an “equivalent” not pre-approved in the RFP. | Proving the materiality of a technical requirement is key. Owners will argue for the right to determine equivalency. |
| Pricing Format | Follows the prescribed unit pricing, lump sum, or other format precisely. | Presents pricing in an alternative format that is arguably clearer but non-conforming. | Deviations in pricing structure are often seen as material as they prevent a true “apples-to-apples” comparison. |
| Required Forms & Signatures | All addenda acknowledged, all forms signed by an authorized officer. | An internal, non-authoritative manager signs a secondary form. | Owners may argue this is a waivable informality, while bidders will frame it as a failure to submit a binding offer. |

![Abstract forms on dark, a sphere balanced by intersecting planes. This signifies high-fidelity execution for institutional digital asset derivatives, embodying RFQ protocols and price discovery within a Prime RFQ](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-platform-microstructure-execution-prime-os.jpg)

![Sleek Prime RFQ interface for institutional digital asset derivatives. An elongated panel displays dynamic numeric readouts, symbolizing multi-leg spread execution and real-time market microstructure](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-prime-os-rfq-options.jpg)

## Execution

When a breach of the implied duty of fairness is established and strategic defenses are overcome, the focus shifts to the execution of legal consequences. These consequences are the system’s corrective mechanisms, designed to address the failure in the “Contract A” process and compensate the injured party. The primary remedy is an award of damages, but the type and quantum of these damages are subject to rigorous legal tests.

The legal system provides a framework for quantifying the economic harm suffered by a compliant bidder who was wrongfully deprived of a fair chance at securing the final contract. In certain situations, non-monetary remedies may also be available, representing a more direct intervention to correct the flawed procurement outcome.

The execution of a legal remedy is a highly technical process. It requires the plaintiff to prove not only the breach but also the quantum of their loss with a reasonable degree of certainty. The courts are careful to avoid speculative awards, so the calculation of damages must be grounded in documented evidence of expenditures and a credible analysis of lost opportunity. The choice of which type of damages to pursue ▴ reliance or expectation ▴ is a critical decision, as the evidentiary burden for each is substantially different.

![A sleek device showcases a rotating translucent teal disc, symbolizing dynamic price discovery and volatility surface visualization within an RFQ protocol. Its numerical display suggests a quantitative pricing engine facilitating algorithmic execution for digital asset derivatives, optimizing market microstructure through an intelligence layer](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/prime-os-for-digital-asset-rfq-execution-system-with-smart-liquidity-routing.jpg)

## Quantifying the Economic Impact of a Breach

The most common form of compensation awarded for a breach of “Contract A” is [reliance damages](https://prime.greeks.live/area/reliance-damages/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite). This remedy is designed to restore the unsuccessful bidder to the economic position they were in before they entered the competition. It compensates them for the reasonable costs incurred in preparing and submitting their proposal. These costs can include:

- **Labor Costs** ▴ Salaries and wages for the estimators, engineers, writers, and administrative staff who worked on the proposal.

- **Consultant Fees** ▴ Payments to external experts, such as design consultants or financial advisors, engaged for the bid. 

- **Direct Expenses** ▴ Costs for printing, binding, delivery, and other direct out-of-pocket expenses.

A more lucrative, yet significantly harder to obtain, remedy is [expectation damages](https://prime.greeks.live/area/expectation-damages/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite). This form of compensation seeks to award the bidder the profits they would have earned had they been awarded “Contract B.” To succeed in a claim for lost profits, the bidder must clear a high evidentiary hurdle. They must prove, on a balance of probabilities, that their proposal would have been selected but for the owner’s breach of fairness.

This requires a detailed reconstruction of the evaluation that was, and the evaluation that should have been. If other compliant bids were also superior to the plaintiff’s, or if the owner had a right to reject all bids, a claim for lost profits will likely fail.

> The primary legal remedy for a breach of fairness is damages, typically limited to the costs of bid preparation unless the bidder can definitively prove they would have won the contract.

![Intersecting abstract geometric planes depict institutional grade RFQ protocols and market microstructure. Speckled surfaces reflect complex order book dynamics and implied volatility, while smooth planes represent high-fidelity execution channels and private quotation systems for digital asset derivatives within a Prime RFQ](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-rfq-protocols-digital-asset-microstructure-execution.jpg)

## Modeling Potential Damage Awards

The calculation of damages is a forensic accounting exercise. The table below provides a simplified model illustrating the potential financial outcomes for a bidder in a hypothetical breach of fairness claim related to a large-scale infrastructure project.

### Hypothetical Damages Calculation Framework

| Damage Component | Description | Calculation Example | Potential Award |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Reliance Damages (Bid Costs) | The documented costs of preparing the proposal. This is the most common remedy. | (1,500 hours of staff time @ $100/hr) + ($50,000 in consultant fees) + ($5,000 in direct costs) | $205,000 |
| Expectation Damages (Lost Profit) | The projected profit from the final “Contract B.” Requires proving the bid would have won. | ($10,000,000 contract value 8% profit margin) – ($205,000 bid costs) | $595,000 |
| Punitive Damages | Awarded in rare cases of malicious, oppressive, or high-handed conduct by the owner. | Discretionary amount determined by the court to punish and deter future conduct. | Highly situational; not typically awarded in contract disputes. |
| Legal Costs | Recovery of a portion of the legal fees incurred in bringing the lawsuit. | Varies by jurisdiction and is often subject to court approval. | Partial to substantial recovery possible if successful. |

![Reflective planes and intersecting elements depict institutional digital asset derivatives market microstructure. A central Principal-driven RFQ protocol ensures high-fidelity execution and atomic settlement across diverse liquidity pools, optimizing multi-leg spread strategies on a Prime RFQ](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-protocol-execution-precision.jpg)

## Non-Monetary System Interventions

While damages are the most common remedy, they are not the only one. In some cases, particularly in the context of public procurement and judicial review, a court may grant non-monetary relief. This can include an order setting aside the owner’s decision and disqualifying the improperly accepted bid. Such a remedy essentially forces a reset of the procurement process.

A court might also issue an injunction to prevent the owner from entering into “Contract B” with the bidder who benefited from the unfair process. These remedies are more interventionist and are generally reserved for clear cases of material breach where a monetary award would be an inadequate solution. They represent a direct judicial command to rectify the malfunctioning procurement system.

![The image displays a sleek, intersecting mechanism atop a foundational blue sphere. It represents the intricate market microstructure of institutional digital asset derivatives trading, facilitating RFQ protocols for block trades](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-prime-os-rfq-execution.jpg)

## References

- Tercon Contractors Ltd. v. British Columbia (Transportation and Highways), 1 S.C.R. 69, 2010 SCC 4.

- Ron Engineering and Construction (Eastern) Ltd. v. The Queen in right of Ontario et al. 1 S.C.R. 111.

- Chinook Aggregates Ltd. v. Abbotsford (District), B.C.J. No. 1353, 35 B.C.L.R. (2d) 241 (C.A.).

- Double N Earthmovers Ltd. v. Edmonton (City), 1 S.C.R. 116, 2007 SCC 3.

- M.J.B. Enterprises Ltd. v. Defence Construction (1951) Ltd. 1 S.C.R. 619.

- Buttcon Limited v. Toronto Electric Commissioners, O.J. No. 1960, 65 O.R. (3d) 601 (S.C.J.).

- Mega Reporting Inc. v. Yukon (Government of), 2018 YKCA 10.

- Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2 S.C.R. 817.

- Hughes Land Company Ltd. v. Manitoba (Attorney General), M.J. No. 343 (Man. C.A.).

![A precision digital token, subtly green with a '0' marker, meticulously engages a sleek, white institutional-grade platform. This symbolizes secure RFQ protocol initiation for high-fidelity execution of complex multi-leg spread strategies, optimizing portfolio margin and capital efficiency within a Principal's Crypto Derivatives OS](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-platform-secure-rfq-protocol-initiation-for-optimal-block-trade-execution.jpg)

## Reflection

![A large, smooth sphere, a textured metallic sphere, and a smaller, swirling sphere rest on an angular, dark, reflective surface. This visualizes a principal liquidity pool, complex structured product, and dynamic volatility surface, representing high-fidelity execution within an institutional digital asset derivatives market microstructure](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-optimized-market-microstructure-precision.jpg)

## A System Calibrated by Consequence

The legal consequences flowing from a breach of fairness in an RFP are more than punitive measures; they are the feedback mechanisms that regulate the entire procurement ecosystem. Each judicial decision, each damage award, recalibrates the expectations of all participants. For owners, these potential outcomes impose a powerful incentive to design robust, transparent, and defensible evaluation systems. For bidders, the existence of legal recourse provides the confidence needed to invest in the competitive process.

The framework of “Contract A” and the duties it implies are essential for creating a market environment where projects are awarded based on merit, not manipulation. Ultimately, understanding these consequences allows an organization to view its procurement protocols not as administrative burdens, but as a critical system for managing risk and achieving strategic objectives in a complex marketplace.

![A dynamic composition depicts an institutional-grade RFQ pipeline connecting a vast liquidity pool to a split circular element representing price discovery and implied volatility. This visual metaphor highlights the precision of an execution management system for digital asset derivatives via private quotation](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-protocol-pipeline-for-precise-price-discovery-and-volatility-surface-analysis.jpg)

## Glossary

<a href="https://prime.greeks.live/area/implied-duty-of-fairness/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite" class="glossary-item-box">
![Abstract composition features two intersecting, sharp-edged planes—one dark, one light—representing distinct liquidity pools or multi-leg spreads. Translucent spherical elements, symbolizing digital asset derivatives and price discovery, balance on this intersection, reflecting complex market microstructure and optimal RFQ protocol execution](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/precision-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-execution-market-microstructure.jpg)

## Implied Duty of Fairness

Meaning ▴ The implied duty of fairness is a legal or ethical principle suggesting that parties in specific contractual or commercial relationships must act with honesty and reasonable consideration for the other party's interests, even if not explicitly written in the contract. </a><a href="https://prime.greeks.live/area/contract-a/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite" class="glossary-item-box">
![Abstract, sleek forms represent an institutional-grade Prime RFQ for digital asset derivatives. Interlocking elements denote RFQ protocol optimization and price discovery across dark pools](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-protocol-execution-engine-5.jpg)

## Contract A

Meaning ▴ In the context of a Request for Quote (RFQ) process, "Contract A" signifies the preliminary, legally binding agreement formed when a dealer submits a firm, executable price quote in response to a client's specific request. </a><a href="https://prime.greeks.live/area/contract-b/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite" class="glossary-item-box">
![Precision-engineered modular components, with teal accents, align at a central interface. This visually embodies an RFQ protocol for institutional digital asset derivatives, facilitating principal liquidity aggregation and high-fidelity execution](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/precision-engineered-institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-execution-interface-for-atomic-settlement.jpg)

## Contract B

Meaning ▴ In the architecture of complex crypto financial transactions, 'Contract B' designates a secondary or ancillary agreement that precisely defines bespoke conditions, collateral arrangements, or specific execution parameters that augment a primary transaction, often referred to as 'Contract A. </a><a href="https://prime.greeks.live/question/what-are-the-primary-legal-differences-between-a-tender-process-and-an-rfp-process-in-public-sector-procurement/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite" class="glossary-item-box">
![A precise, multi-faceted geometric structure represents institutional digital asset derivatives RFQ protocols. Its sharp angles denote high-fidelity execution and price discovery for multi-leg spread strategies, symbolizing capital efficiency and atomic settlement within a Prime RFQ](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-execution-microstructure-framework.jpg)

## Procurement Process

A tender creates a binding process contract upon bid submission; an RFP initiates a flexible, non-binding negotiation. </a><a href="https://prime.greeks.live/area/rfp-documents/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite" class="glossary-item-box">
![A scratched blue sphere, representing market microstructure and liquidity pool for digital asset derivatives, encases a smooth teal sphere, symbolizing a private quotation via RFQ protocol. An institutional-grade structure suggests a Prime RFQ facilitating high-fidelity execution and managing counterparty risk](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-rfq-protocols-optimizing-digital-asset-derivative-execution-microstructure.jpg)

## Rfp Documents

Meaning ▴ RFP documents refer to the complete set of materials provided by an organization when issuing a Request for Proposal (RFP), detailing its needs and soliciting bids from vendors. </a><a href="https://prime.greeks.live/area/materially-non-compliant-bid/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite" class="glossary-item-box">
![A transparent sphere, bisected by dark rods, symbolizes an RFQ protocol's core. This represents multi-leg spread execution within a high-fidelity market microstructure for institutional grade digital asset derivatives, ensuring optimal price discovery and capital efficiency via Prime RFQ](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/prime-os-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-protocols-high-fidelity-execution.jpg)

## Materially Non-Compliant Bid

Meaning ▴ A Materially Non-Compliant Bid is a submission within a Request for Quote (RFQ) process for crypto assets or services that contains significant deviations from the essential terms, conditions, or technical specifications outlined in the original solicitation document. </a><a href="https://prime.greeks.live/area/bid-shopping/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite" class="glossary-item-box">
![A central, intricate blue mechanism, evocative of an Execution Management System EMS or Prime RFQ, embodies algorithmic trading. Transparent rings signify dynamic liquidity pools and price discovery for institutional digital asset derivatives](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/precision-engineered-institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-framework-driving-high-fidelity-rfq-execution-and-optimized-market-microstructure-for-capital-efficiency.jpg)

## Bid Shopping

Meaning ▴ Bid Shopping, in the context of crypto request for quote (RFQ) systems and institutional options trading, refers to the practice where a market participant, having received an initial price quote for a desired trade, subsequently uses that quote to solicit better terms from other liquidity providers. </a><a href="https://prime.greeks.live/area/procedural-fairness/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite" class="glossary-item-box">
![A polished, dark teal institutional-grade mechanism reveals an internal beige interface, precisely deploying a metallic, arrow-etched component. This signifies high-fidelity execution within an RFQ protocol, enabling atomic settlement and optimized price discovery for institutional digital asset derivatives and multi-leg spreads, ensuring minimal slippage and robust capital efficiency](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/quantitative-finance-driven-rfq-workflow-for-best-execution-in-digital-assets.jpg)

## Procedural Fairness

Meaning ▴ Procedural Fairness, within the context of crypto markets and their underlying systems architecture, refers to the unwavering adherence to transparent, unbiased, and consistently applied rules and processes in the handling, execution, and settlement of digital asset transactions. </a><a href="https://prime.greeks.live/area/exclusion-of-liability-clause/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite" class="glossary-item-box">
![A dynamic visual representation of an institutional trading system, featuring a central liquidity aggregation engine emitting a controlled order flow through dedicated market infrastructure. This illustrates high-fidelity execution of digital asset derivatives, optimizing price discovery within a private quotation environment for block trades, ensuring capital efficiency](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/principal-os-driving-high-fidelity-execution-for-digital-asset-derivatives-through-optimized-rfq-protocols-and-smart-order-routing.jpg)

## Exclusion of Liability Clause

Meaning ▴ An Exclusion of Liability Clause is a contractual provision specifically designed to limit or entirely negate one party's legal responsibility for specified damages, losses, or failures arising from a contract or service agreement. </a><a href="https://prime.greeks.live/area/tercon-test/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite" class="glossary-item-box">
![A transparent bar precisely intersects a dark blue circular module, symbolizing an RFQ protocol for institutional digital asset derivatives. This depicts high-fidelity execution within a dynamic liquidity pool, optimizing market microstructure via a Prime RFQ](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-rfq-protocol-for-prime-os-execution.jpg)

## Tercon Test

Meaning ▴ The Tercon Test refers to a legal framework, originating from Canadian jurisprudence, used to determine the enforceability of exclusion clauses or limitation of liability clauses within contracts. </a><a href="https://prime.greeks.live/area/reliance-damages/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite" class="glossary-item-box">
![A deconstructed spherical object, segmented into distinct horizontal layers, slightly offset, symbolizing the granular components of an institutional digital asset derivatives platform. Each layer represents a liquidity pool or RFQ protocol, showcasing modular execution pathways and dynamic price discovery within a Prime RFQ architecture for high-fidelity execution and systemic risk mitigation](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/modular-institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-execution-framework-dissected-for-optimal-rfq-performance.jpg)

## Reliance Damages

Meaning ▴ Reliance Damages are a form of monetary compensation awarded to a party to restore their position to what it was before entering a contract, rather than compensating for lost profits from the contract itself. </a><a href="https://prime.greeks.live/area/expectation-damages/?utm_source=options.greeks.live&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=satellite" class="glossary-item-box">
![A reflective surface supports a sharp metallic element, stabilized by a sphere, alongside translucent teal prisms. This abstractly represents institutional-grade digital asset derivatives RFQ protocol price discovery within a Prime RFQ, emphasizing high-fidelity execution and liquidity pool optimization](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-prime-os-microstructure-optimization.jpg)

## Expectation Damages

Meaning ▴ Expectation Damages, within the legal and financial framework applicable to crypto investing and trading contracts, represent the monetary compensation awarded to a non-breaching party to restore them to the financial position they would have occupied had the contract been fully performed. </a>

**Tags:** [Procedural Fairness](https://options.greeks.live/area/procedural-fairness/), [RFP Documents](https://options.greeks.live/area/rfp-documents/), [Ron Engineering](https://options.greeks.live/area/ron-engineering/), [Contract A](https://options.greeks.live/area/contract-a/), [Reliance Damages](https://options.greeks.live/area/reliance-damages/), [RFP Process](https://options.greeks.live/area/rfp-process/)	

## Discover More

- 
### [What Is the Practical Difference between a Binding ‘Contract A’ Rfp and a Non-Binding Rfp?](https://options.greeks.live/question/what-is-the-practical-difference-between-a-binding-contract-a-rfp-and-a-non-binding-rfp/)
![A central blue sphere, representing a Liquidity Pool, balances on a white dome, the Prime RFQ. Perpendicular beige and teal arms, embodying RFQ protocols and Multi-Leg Spread strategies, extend to four peripheral blue elements. This depicts High-Fidelity Execution of Digital Asset Derivatives within complex Market Microstructure, optimizing Capital Efficiency and mitigating Counterparty Risk.](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/high-fidelity-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-protocol-execution-framework.jpg)

A binding 'Contract A' RFP creates an immediate contractual obligation upon bid submission, while a non-binding RFP is a flexible invitation to negotiate.

- 
### [How Does the Legal Concept of “Contract A” Affect a Bidder’s Rights in an Rfp Process?](https://options.greeks.live/question/how-does-the-legal-concept-of-contract-a-affect-a-bidders-rights-in-an-rfp-process/)
![A transparent, multi-faceted component, indicative of an RFQ engine's intricate market microstructure logic, emerges from complex FIX Protocol connectivity. Its sharp edges signify high-fidelity execution and price discovery precision for institutional digital asset derivatives. This Prime RFQ module optimizes algorithmic trading and capital efficiency.](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-engine-optimized-for-best-execution.jpg)

Contract A creates a binding preliminary contract from a compliant bid, granting bidders enforceable rights to a fair and transparent RFP process.

- 
### [What Are the Legal Implications of a Non-Transparent Rfp Q&A Process?](https://options.greeks.live/question/what-are-the-legal-implications-of-a-non-transparent-rfp-qa-process/)
![Intricate internal machinery reveals a high-fidelity execution engine for institutional digital asset derivatives. Precision components, including a multi-leg spread mechanism and data flow conduits, symbolize a sophisticated RFQ protocol facilitating atomic settlement and robust price discovery within a principal's Prime RFQ.](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-engine-microstructure.jpg)

A non-transparent RFP Q&A process creates systemic legal exposure by breaching the duty of fairness and creating information asymmetry.

- 
### [What Is the “Contract A/Contract B” Framework and How Does It Impact the Rfp Process?](https://options.greeks.live/question/what-is-the-contract-a-contract-b-framework-and-how-does-it-impact-the-rfp-process/)
![Precisely engineered abstract structure featuring translucent and opaque blades converging at a central hub. This embodies institutional RFQ protocol for digital asset derivatives, representing dynamic liquidity aggregation, high-fidelity execution, and complex multi-leg spread price discovery.](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/prime-os-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-multi-leg-execution-protocol.jpg)

The "Contract A/Contract B" framework imposes a two-stage contract system on RFPs, creating a binding process contract (A) and a final work contract (B).

- 
### [How Does a Reservation of Rights Clause in a Private RFP Affect a Bidder’s Legal Recourse?](https://options.greeks.live/question/how-does-a-reservation-of-rights-clause-in-a-private-rfp-affect-a-bidders-legal-recourse/)
![A crystalline droplet, representing a block trade or liquidity pool, rests precisely on an advanced Crypto Derivatives OS platform. Its internal shimmering particles signify aggregated order flow and implied volatility data, demonstrating high-fidelity execution and capital efficiency within market microstructure, facilitating private quotation via RFQ protocols.](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-prime-os-rfq-protocol-best-execution.jpg)

A reservation of rights clause in a private RFP systematically limits a bidder's legal recourse by seeking to prevent the formation of a process contract.

- 
### [How Can a Proponent Effectively Disclaim the Creation of Contract a in an Rfp?](https://options.greeks.live/question/how-can-a-proponent-effectively-disclaim-the-creation-of-contract-a-in-an-rfp/)
![A multi-layered, circular device with a central concentric lens. It symbolizes an RFQ engine for precision price discovery and high-fidelity execution. This robust system enables institutional digital asset derivatives trading, reflecting advanced market microstructure, volatility surface analysis, Principal's operational framework, and efficient options trading.](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-protocol-engine-for-precision-execution.jpg)

A proponent disclaims Contract A by drafting an RFP with explicit, unambiguous language that preserves its absolute discretion.

- 
### [What Are the Key Differences between a Tender and an Rfp in Terms of Legal Obligations?](https://options.greeks.live/question/what-are-the-key-differences-between-a-tender-and-an-rfp-in-terms-of-legal-obligations/)
![Two sharp, intersecting blades, one white, one blue, represent precise RFQ protocols and high-fidelity execution within complex market microstructure. Behind them, translucent wavy forms signify dynamic liquidity pools, multi-leg spreads, and volatility surfaces. This visual encapsulates prime brokerage capabilities for atomic settlement.](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-execution-optimized-liquidity-aggregation-principal-prime-os-intelligence-layer.jpg)

A Tender creates a binding bid contract upon submission, while an RFP initiates a flexible negotiation process.

- 
### [What Is the “Contract A” and “Contract B” Theory and How Does It Impact Rfp Liability?](https://options.greeks.live/question/what-is-the-contract-a-and-contract-b-theory-and-how-does-it-impact-rfp-liability/)
![Two distinct ovular components, beige and teal, slightly separated, reveal intricate internal gears. This visualizes an Institutional Digital Asset Derivatives engine, emphasizing automated RFQ execution, complex market microstructure, and high-fidelity execution within a Principal's Prime RFQ for optimal price discovery and block trade capital efficiency.](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-automated-rfq-execution-microstructure-revealing-principal-prime-os-intelligence-layer-for-high-fidelity-execution-and-capital-efficiency.jpg)

The Contract A/B theory establishes that an RFP process creates two contracts, with "Contract A" binding all parties to the procedural rules of the bid itself.

- 
### [How Does the Implied Duty of Fairness Constrain an Rfp Issuer’s Evaluation Process?](https://options.greeks.live/question/how-does-the-implied-duty-of-fairness-constrain-an-rfp-issuers-evaluation-process/)
![Sleek Prime RFQ interface for institutional digital asset derivatives. An elongated panel displays dynamic numeric readouts, symbolizing multi-leg spread execution and real-time market microstructure. A transparent sphere signifies RFQ protocol private quotation and implied volatility, emphasizing atomic settlement and low latency.](https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-prime-os-rfq-options.jpg)

The implied duty of fairness constrains an RFP issuer by creating a binding process contract that mandates transparent, objective evaluation based solely on pre-disclosed criteria.

---

## Raw Schema Data

```json
{
    "@context": "https://schema.org",
    "@type": "BreadcrumbList",
    "itemListElement": [
        {
            "@type": "ListItem",
            "position": 1,
            "name": "Home",
            "item": "https://options.greeks.live"
        },
        {
            "@type": "ListItem",
            "position": 2,
            "name": "Question",
            "item": "https://options.greeks.live/question/"
        },
        {
            "@type": "ListItem",
            "position": 3,
            "name": "What Are the Legal Consequences for an Owner Who Breaches the Implied Duty of Fairness in an Rfp Process?",
            "item": "https://options.greeks.live/question/what-are-the-legal-consequences-for-an-owner-who-breaches-the-implied-duty-of-fairness-in-an-rfp-process/"
        }
    ]
}
```

```json
{
    "@context": "https://schema.org",
    "@type": "Organization",
    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization",
    "name": "Greeks.Live",
    "url": "https://greeks.live/",
    "description": "Greeks.live is the definitive toolkit for the professional options trader, dedicated to empowering our users with institutional-grade data, advanced analytics, and a comprehensive suite of trading tools designed to provide a decisive edge in the market. Every article and guide published under the Greeks.live name is a product of our deep commitment to data-driven analysis and our mission to support the global trading community.",
    "email": "support@greeks.live",
    "logo": {
        "@type": "ImageObject",
        "url": "https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Greeks.Live-Logo-Icon.svg"
    },
    "hasPart": [
        {
            "@type": "WebSite",
            "name": "About Us",
            "url": "https://about.greeks.live"
        },
        {
            "@type": "WebSite",
            "name": "App Download Page",
            "url": "https://about.greeks.live/#/download/basic_trade"
        },
        {
            "@type": "WebSite",
            "name": "Newcomers' Guide",
            "url": "https://twisty-sign-c8b.notion.site/Guide-for-Greeks-live-X-Deribit-Newbies-5a08a3052822427d800af6eaf3704c8d"
        },
        {
            "@type": "WebSite",
            "name": "Knowledge Base",
            "url": "https://linktr.ee/greeks.live"
        },
        {
            "@type": "WebSite",
            "name": "Option Terminology",
            "url": "https://greekslive.notion.site/88dfc00e7c584d4d8969b6302a79a12f?pvs=4"
        },
        {
            "@type": "WebSite",
            "name": "Terms of Service",
            "url": "https://greeks.live/#/tos"
        },
        {
            "@type": "WebSite",
            "name": "Disclaimer",
            "url": "https://greeks.live/#/disclaimer"
        }
    ],
    "sameAs": [
        "https://x.com/greekslive",
        "https://youtube.com/@greeks_live?si=-KjT0Lkw4WUCI0tD",
        "https://t.me/greekslive_notifications",
        "https://t.me/greekslive",
        "https://pinterest.com/greekslive/"
    ],
    "makesOffer": [
        {
            "@type": "Offer",
            "itemOffered": {
                "@type": "Service",
                "name": "RFQ Platform",
                "url": "https://rfq.greeks.live",
                "description": "Execute institutional-grade block trades for crypto options and futures. This platform provides deep, over-the-counter (OTC) liquidity via a professional Request for Quote system.",
                "provider": {
                    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
                }
            }
        },
        {
            "@type": "Offer",
            "itemOffered": {
                "@type": "Service",
                "name": "Lending Tools",
                "url": "https://lend.greeks.live",
                "description": "Manage crypto lending and borrowing activities to earn yield or secure loans. This suite of tools helps users analyze interest rates and manage collateralized debt positions.",
                "provider": {
                    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
                }
            }
        },
        {
            "@type": "Offer",
            "itemOffered": {
                "@type": "Service",
                "name": "Data Lab",
                "url": "https://greeks.live/#/deribit/tools/datalab/BTC",
                "description": "Analyze historical and real-time options data with advanced metrics. This tool is designed for backtesting strategies and identifying market trends through comprehensive data visualization.",
                "provider": {
                    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
                }
            }
        },
        {
            "@type": "Offer",
            "itemOffered": {
                "@type": "Service",
                "name": "Profit & Loss Analysis (PnL)",
                "url": "https://greeks.live/#/deribit/tools/pnl_analysis",
                "description": "Track and analyze the Profit and Loss (PnL) of your options portfolio. This tool provides detailed performance metrics to help traders evaluate and refine their strategies.",
                "provider": {
                    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
                }
            }
        },
        {
            "@type": "Offer",
            "itemOffered": {
                "@type": "Service",
                "name": "Position Visualization",
                "url": "https://greeks.live/#/deribit/tools/pv/BTC",
                "description": "Visualize complex options positions and their corresponding risk profiles. This tool generates payoff diagrams to help traders intuitively understand potential profit, loss, and exposure.",
                "provider": {
                    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
                }
            }
        },
        {
            "@type": "Offer",
            "itemOffered": {
                "@type": "Service",
                "name": "Options Calculator",
                "url": "https://greeks.live/#/deribit/tools/calculator",
                "description": "Calculate the theoretical price and risk parameters ('the Greeks') of crypto options. An essential tool for pricing new trades and analyzing the sensitivity of existing positions.",
                "provider": {
                    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
                }
            }
        },
        {
            "@type": "Offer",
            "itemOffered": {
                "@type": "Service",
                "name": "Greeks.live Main Platform",
                "url": "https://greeks.live/",
                "description": "The central hub for the Greeks.live suite of professional cryptocurrency options and derivatives trading tools. Access analytics, manage positions, and explore the ecosystem.",
                "provider": {
                    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
                }
            }
        },
        {
            "@type": "Offer",
            "itemOffered": {
                "@type": "Service",
                "name": "Community Forum",
                "url": "https://t.greeks.live",
                "description": "Join the official Greeks.live community. Connect with other traders, share insights, and receive the latest updates directly from the team.",
                "provider": {
                    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
                }
            }
        },
        {
            "@type": "Offer",
            "itemOffered": {
                "@type": "Service",
                "name": "Greeks.live for Deribit",
                "url": "http://deribit.greeks.live",
                "description": "A dedicated interface for trading on the Deribit exchange. This platform leverages Greeks.live's advanced analytics and tools specifically for users of Deribit's options and futures markets.",
                "provider": {
                    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
                }
            }
        },
        {
            "@type": "Offer",
            "itemOffered": {
                "@type": "Service",
                "name": "Greeks.live for OKX",
                "url": "http://okx.greeks.live",
                "description": "A dedicated interface for trading on the OKX exchange. This platform integrates Greeks.live's powerful analytics with the OKX marketplace, focusing on its options and derivatives products.",
                "provider": {
                    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
                }
            }
        },
        {
            "@type": "Offer",
            "itemOffered": {
                "@type": "Service",
                "name": "GLVS.AI Trading Platform",
                "url": "https://www.glvs.ai/",
                "description": "An AI-powered platform for automated crypto options trading. Leverage advanced algorithms and data-driven signals to develop and deploy sophisticated, hands-free trading strategies.",
                "provider": {
                    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
                }
            }
        },
        {
            "@type": "Offer",
            "itemOffered": {
                "@type": "Service",
                "name": "API Testnet & Sandbox",
                "url": "https://test.greeks.live",
                "description": "A dedicated testnet environment for developers to test their API integrations and automated trading strategies. This sandbox allows for full functionality testing without risking real funds.",
                "provider": {
                    "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
                }
            }
        }
    ],
    "subOrganization": [
        {
            "@type": "Organization",
            "name": "GreeksLive HK Co., Limited",
            "email": "support@greeks.live",
            "telephone": "+852-56418949",
            "address": {
                "@type": "PostalAddress",
                "streetAddress": "Unit 11, 27/F, K. Wah Centre, 191 Java Road",
                "addressLocality": "Hong Kong",
                "addressRegion": "North Point",
                "addressCountry": "CN",
                "postalCode": "0000"
            },
            "geo": {
                "@type": "GeoCoordinates",
                "latitude": "22.2932357",
                "longitude": "114.2022026"
            },
            "image": "https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Wah-Centre-Hong-Kong.jpg"
        }
    ]
}
```

```json
{
    "@context": "https://schema.org",
    "@type": "Article",
    "mainEntityOfPage": {
        "@type": "WebPage",
        "@id": "https://options.greeks.live/question/what-are-the-legal-consequences-for-an-owner-who-breaches-the-implied-duty-of-fairness-in-an-rfp-process/"
    },
    "headline": "What Are the Legal Consequences for an Owner Who Breaches the Implied Duty of Fairness in an Rfp Process? \u25b4 Question",
    "description": "A breach of the implied duty of fairness in an RFP triggers legal consequences, primarily damages for bid preparation costs. \u25b4 Question",
    "url": "https://options.greeks.live/question/what-are-the-legal-consequences-for-an-owner-who-breaches-the-implied-duty-of-fairness-in-an-rfp-process/",
    "datePublished": "2025-08-10T05:45:32+00:00",
    "dateModified": "2025-10-31T06:08:44+00:00",
    "articleSection": [
        "Question"
    ],
    "author": {
        "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
    },
    "publisher": {
        "@id": "https://greeks.live/#organization"
    },
    "image": {
        "@type": "ImageObject",
        "url": "https://options.greeks.live/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/institutional-digital-asset-derivatives-rfq-prime-os-execution-hub.jpg",
        "caption": "A robust, industrial-grade mechanism with a central glowing orb, symbolizing the intelligence layer of a Prime RFQ for institutional digital asset derivatives. It depicts intricate market microstructure and RFQ protocols essential for high-fidelity execution of block trades, facilitating price discovery and liquidity aggregation. The design reflects a system engineered for capital efficiency, mitigating systemic risk through advanced quantitative analysis and ensuring best execution across complex multi-leg spreads and implied volatility surfaces."
    },
    "keywords": [
        "Bid Shopping",
        "Contract A",
        "Contract B",
        "Exclusion of Liability Clause",
        "Expectation Damages",
        "Implied Duty of Fairness",
        "Materially Non-Compliant Bid",
        "Procedural Fairness",
        "Procurement Law",
        "Reliance Damages",
        "RFP Documents",
        "RFP Process",
        "Ron Engineering",
        "Tercon Test"
    ]
}
```

```json
{
    "@context": "https://schema.org",
    "@type": "WebSite",
    "url": "https://options.greeks.live/",
    "potentialAction": {
        "@type": "SearchAction",
        "target": "https://options.greeks.live/?s=search_term_string",
        "query-input": "required name=search_term_string"
    }
}
```


---

**Original URL:** https://options.greeks.live/question/what-are-the-legal-consequences-for-an-owner-who-breaches-the-implied-duty-of-fairness-in-an-rfp-process/
