The legal dispute between the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation and Hitachi intensified after HART filed a counterclaim responding to Hitachi’s November 17 lawsuit, which sought millions in damages for alleged project delays caused by HART. HART’s response asserts that Hitachi’s delay claims are largely unfounded and accuses the company of breaching its contract and potentially violating Hawaii’s False Claim Act by submitting false statements and records, according to the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation.
Hitachi’s initial lawsuit was dismissed due to procedural errors, including failing to present claims to Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation before filing, as noted in the November 14, 64-page Contracting Officer’s Decision by Lori Kahikina. The decision, made public, rejected most of Hitachi’s claims as unsubstantiated and noted allegations that Hitachi manipulated schedules to shift blame for delays onto HART.
Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation's counterclaim intensifies these accusations, suggesting Hitachi violated the False Claim Act by supporting a false claim with misleading information, a move that could potentially cost Hitachi millions as HART seeks not just simple but treble damages, backed by the state's legal provisions which could also impose additional civil penalties. This act, rooted in protection against fraud, allows HART to demand these escalated compensation amounts. Amidst legal skirmishes, the stakes rise as HART's counterclaim underlines a deeper contention, they argue Hitachi's delays are significant enough to merit a substantial financial penalty, and if the court is to side with HART on the basis of Hawaii's False Claim Act, it could mean that Hitachi would have to cough up to three times the damages Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation has suffered, plus penalties, which emphasizes the scale and gravity of the dispute and what's at risk for both parties involved.
