Procurement disputes

We acted on behalf of a UK waste management company in a procurement challenge in the High Court in relation to a £7m NHS waste management contract award. The dispute was a complex one based not only on the NHS’ breach of the procurement law but its failure to assess the impact of the Waste Framework Directive and the Hierarchy of Waste Guidelines and their impact of the tenders submitted. The six NHS trusts in question withdrew their defence before trial and consented to judgment on behalf of the firm’s private sector client.

The judgment included a declaration that the procurement process had been carried out unlawfully; an order setting aside the contract award; and an award of damages for loss of profit, lost contribution to overheads and wasted tender costs. The contracting authorities made a substantial payment towards our client’s legal costs.

An unsuccessful tenderer challenged a contract award concerning the provision of ground works services. The contracting authority was a consortium of housing associations. The value of the intended contract award was £1.75m. Following the exchange of initial correspondence and mediation, the challenge was withdrawn. Both sides paid their own costs. Service provision to the registered providers by the successful tenderer under the contract award continued uninterrupted throughout the process.

We successfully advised a small charity, providing domiciliary care services to a local authority, in a dispute over pricing following a contract award under the Public Procurement Regulations 2015. The matter settled successfully on an out of court basis following mediation.

We defended an application brought by a party challenging a contract award made by NHS England concerning clinical waste disposal. The application was brought against our client, the successful bidder, on the grounds that contrary to Reg. 69 Public Contracts Regulations 2015, NHS England failed to examine a tender submission which the challenger alleged was of an abnormally low value. The application was dismissed. Our client recovered approximately 90% of its legal costs. The proceedings against NHS England to remove the contract award from our client were dismissed.

The challenges were brought by unsuccessful bidders in relation to two separate tenders concerning contracts for the supply of IT services and consumables and a restorative justice programme.

Proceedings were issued by an unsuccessful bidder in the Technology & Construction Court against West Midlands Police in relation to its failure to be included at the Invitation to Tender stage for the IT Contract. The litigation was pursued by the claimant with little thought as to the merits of the challenge or its cost to the public purse. Ultimately this was to no avail. The claimant withdrew its claim from the court lists without trial on the basis it would pay West Midlands’ legal costs.

The second challenge was brought by an unsuccessful bidder alleging bias in WMP’s tender process. The challenge was originally initiated under the standstill period under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 but did not proceed to court following extensive inter party correspondence with the challenger’s solicitors.

We acted on behalf of K2 Recovery Services in overturning a Northamptonshire Police contract award made pursuant to the Public Contracts Regulations 2015.

The contract award concerned a tender for the provision of vehicle recovery services for Northamptonshire Police. The contract was worth in the region of £3.6 million to K2 and covered the removal of abandoned vehicles, stolen vehicles, untaxed vehicles and uninsured vehicles throughout Northamptonshire using the Northamptonshire Police’s statutory powers.

There were serious defects in the way K2’s tender had been assessed and how the procurement process had been handled on behalf of Northamptonshire Police. The contract award notice was also defective. It did not comply with Reg. 86 Public Contract Regulations 2015.

Northamptonshire withdrew the contract award notice and sent the contract out for re-tender. This was achieved without the need for litigation. Following the retendering process, the contract was awarded to K2.

We successfully acted against two local authorities for a FSTE 250 outsourcing company in respect of two separate contract awards worth £95 million and £120 million over their respective terms.

Both contract awards were abandoned by the contracting authorities. Our client proceeded to re-tender for both contracts. In relation to the first contract award the local authority issued three separate and sequential contract award notices, all of which it then had to withdraw. After proceedings were issued the procurement was abandoned. The local authority then agreed to an adverse costs order being made against it in a consent order approved by the High Court.

We acted on behalf of a consultancy business in a procurement challenge in the High Court in Cardiff concerning a £29m contract for regional business support services. Our client’s response on pricing was disqualified and as a result its tender excluded from the procurement for being non-compliant.

The challenge was based on inconsistencies within the tender documents concerning the methodology used for scoring and the conflicting provisions concerning disqualification.

The parties reached a confidential resolution. The proceedings were withdrawn and the tender reprocured with our client being successful in winning the contract.