Contracts & Procurement
Part B services The categories
of Remedial discretion services
listed in Part B of Schedule 3 to the PCR are subject only to very limited substantive obligations (mainly relating to technical specifi cations and
publication of award
notices) (reg. 5(2)). But they are subject to the general obligations of transparency and equal treatment in reg. 4, at least to the extent that a contract is of cross-border interest
and engages the
provisions of the EU Treaty. It is frequently argued that these general obligations give rise to detailed requirements vis-à-vis the conduct of the tender procedure, which are analogous to those applying to Part A services.
Read More
Where a contract has not been entered into, the Court has a broad discretion under reg. 47I(2) to set aside a decision
or action, award order
amendment of a document and/or
damages.
But it had been assumed until recently that where a claimant had been prejudiced by a breach of the PCR in such a case, the usual remedy would be a re-running
of
the tender procedure, or the relevant stages of the tender procedure. This may not now always be the case.
Read More
Selection and disclosure of evaluation criteria
Case-law under the suggests
that PCR authorities
have a very broad discretion to choose their evaluation criteria, the main limitations being
that criteria
must
be objective and linked to the subject matter of the contract. However, the series of
cases brought against
the LSC by solicitors fi rms who failed to win contracts in recent tendering rounds appear
to establish that
criteria are challengeable on standard public law grounds, including, as in Hereward & Foster, for failure to comply with the
public sector equality duty. Read More
Contracts and Procurement
Education
Health and Social Care
Social Enterpri
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22