Unauthorized commitments are agreements that are NOT binding solely because of what reason?

Unauthorized commitments occur when a government employee, without the proper authority, enters into an agreement that obligates the government to pay or provide goods or services. In this scenario, the key issue is the authority of the representative making the commitment. A government representative must possess the specific authority delegated to them in order to create a binding agreement. If they lack that authority, any agreement they make is not legally binding on the government, regardless of its form or content.

In contrast, while an oral agreement, failure to follow specific written requirements, or a lack of final approval can complicate the situation, none of these factors alone are enough to render a commitment unauthorized. The fundamental principle is that the representative's lack of authority is what ultimately leads to the non-binding nature of the agreement. Therefore, the emphasis is on the authority aspect in determining whether a commitment is considered unauthorized.